LEEK   SCULPTURE 


■■H 


■ 


This   book   is   DUE  on   the   last  date  stamped   below 


tftf  1  -    ^4*4    m  i  .  ¥*■ 


SOUTHERN    BRANCH 

7ERSITY  c  'Nl/ 

lib; 

"^S  ang1.: 


GREEK    SERIFS    FOR    COLLEGES    AND    SCHOOLS 

EDITED 
i  NDER   THE   SUPERVISION  OF 

HERBERT    WEIR    SMYTH,    Ph.D. 

ELIOT    PKOFBSSOK   <  >K   GREEK    LITERATI  RE    1\    11  VKVARD    UNIVERSITY 


VOLUMES    OF    THE    SERIES 
GREEK    GRAMMAR.     By  the  Editor. 

BEGINNER'S    GREEK    BOOK.      Prof.  Allen    R.  Benner,  Phillips    Academy,   An- 

dover;  and  the   Editor.     $1.25. 
BRIEF    GREEK    SYNTAX.      Prof.  Louis  Bevier,  Jr.,  Rutgers  College.     $0.90. 
GREEK    PROSE    READER.       Prof.  F.  E.  Woodruff,  Bowdoin  College,  and  Prof.  J. 

W.  Hewitt,  Wesleyan  University. 
GREEK    PROSE    COMPOSITION    FOR    SCHOOLS.       Clarence  W.  Gleason, 

Volkmann  School,  Boston.     $0.80. 

GREEK     PROSE     COMPOSITION    FOR    COLLEGES.      Prof.  Edward  H. 

Spieker,  Johns  Hopkins  University.     $1.30. 

AESCHYLUS.      AGAMEMNON.      Prof.  Paul  Shorey,  University  of  Chicago. 

AESCHYLUS.      PROMETHEUS.      Prof.  J.  E.  Harry,  University  of  Cincinnati.     $1.50. 

ARISTOPHANES.      CLOUDS.      Dr.  L.  L.  Forman,  Cornell  University. 

DEMOSTHENES.      ON   THE   CROWN.       Prof.    Milton  W.   Humphreys,   University 
of  Virginia. 

EURIPIDES.       IPHIGENIA     IN     TAURIS.        Prof.    William   N.    Bates,  University  of 
Pennsylvania.     $1.25. 

EURIPIDES.      MEDEA.      Prof.  Mortimer  Lamson  Earle,  Columbia  University.      $1.23. 

HERODOTUS.       Books   VII -VIII.        Prof.  Charles  Forster  Smith  and  Prof.  Arthur 
Gordon  Laird,  University  of  Wisconsin.     $1.75. 

HOMER.      ILIAD.      Prof.  J.  R.  S.  Sterrett,  Cornell  University. 

Books  I.-III.  and  Selections.    $1.60.     Books  I.— III.    $1.20. 

HOMER.      ODYSSEY.       Prof.  Charles  B.  Gulick,  Harvard  University. 

LYSIAS.      Prof.  Charles  D.  Adams,  Dartmouth  College.     $1.50. 

PLATO.      APOLOGY  AND   CRITO.      Prof.  Isaac  Flagg,  University  of  California.    $1.40. 

PLATO.      EUTHYPHRO.      Prof.  William  A.  Heidel,  Wesleyan  University.     $1.00. 

THEOCRITUS.       Prof.   Henry  R.  Fairclough  and  Prof.  Augustus  T.  Murray,  Leland 
Stanford,  Jr.,  University. 

THUCYDIDES.        Books   II.-III.       Prof.  W.   A.    Lamberton,   University   of  Penn- 
sylvania.    $1.75. 

THUCYDIDES.      Books   VI.-VII.      Prof.  E.  D.  Perry,  Columbia  University. 

XENOPHON.      ANABASIS.      Books  I.-IV.      Dr.  M.  W.  Mather,  late  Instructor  in 
Harvard  University,  and  Prof.  J.  W.  Hewitt,  Wesleyan  University. 

XENOPHON.      HELLENICA    (Selections).       Prof.  Carleton  L.  Brownson,  College  of 
the  City  of  New  York.      $1.65. 

XENOPHON.      MEMORABILIA.      Prof.  W.  W.  Baker,  Haverford  College. 

GREEK    ARCHAEOLOGY.      Prof.  Harold  N.  Fowler,  Western  Reserve  University, 
and  Prof.  James  R.  Wheeler,  Columbia  University.     $2.00. 

GREEK    LITERATURE.       Dr.  Wilmer  Cave  Wright,  Bryn  Mawr  College.     $1.50. 

GREEK    PUBLIC     LIFE.      Prof.  Henry  A.  Sill,  Cornell  University. 

GREEK    RELIGION.      Arthur  Fairbanks,    Ph.D.,    Litt  D.,   Director   of   the   Boston 
Museum  of  Fine  Arts. 

GREEK    SCULFrURE.      Prof.  Rufus  B.  Richardson,  formerly  Director  of  the  Ameri- 
can School  of  Classical  Studies,  Athens. 

INTRODUCTION     TO    THE    GREEK    DRAMA.     William  Fenwick  Harris, 

late  Assistant  Professor  in  Harvard  University. 

BEGINNER'S    NEW    TESTAMENT    GREEK    BOOK.      Prof.  William  H. 

P.  Hatch,  General  Theological  Seminary,  New  York. 

Others  to  be  announced  later. 


NIKE   OF   SAMOTHRAKE 
(Louvre) 


A    HISTORY 


01 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


BY 


RUFUS    B.    RICHARDSON 

KORMERLY    DIRECTOR    OK   THE    AMERICAN    SCHOOL 
UK   CLASSICAL   STUDIES   AT   ATHENS 


■:*»:< 


M  \v   V<  »RK  ■  :  ■  <  INCINNAT1  ■:■  CHICAGO 

A  M  ERICA  N    Hook    Co  M  PANY 


81068 


Copyright,  1911,  by 
AMERICAN    BOOK   COMPANY. 

Entered  at  Stationers'  Hall,  London. 


RICHARDSON.      GREEK   SCULPTURE. 
W.  P.     I 


*  •      *  •        ^  »  •  ■*  «    .     i  «»  •  1  *  °  •        •  *  •  •  fc       *      "      *.  *       j 

•  *      ••••.♦*'*         «    •  •      ••»  •  ,  •   .       «  ■•••••;       . 


. * » •»»»»  * 


'   •         •    t  °         ".'•«'"    v  V"    « 


NJ  I 


TO   A   FRIEND 

WHO   WAS    A    FRIEND    INDEED 

3o\m  f>enrg  lUriobt 


J 


PREFACE 

In  this  work    I    have   been    materially   assisted  by  the 

editor,  Professor  Herbert  Weir  Smyth,  to  whose  judgement 

I   have  often   referred.      Professor  George    II.   Chase  and 

<+\.   Professor  Harold  N.  Fowler  have  read  all  the  proof  sheets, 

and  given  me  many  valuable  suggestions.    Professor  Arthur 

Sherburne  Hardy  has  placed  me  under  lasting  obligation 

for  his  valuable  assistance. 

K 111  S    B.    RICHARDSON. 


J 


TABLE    OF   CONTENTS 

PAGE 
iMKiiDUCTION 15 

CHAPTER   I 
Oldest  or  Mycenaean  Period 30 

CHAPTER  II 
The  Aki  h  uc  Pi  biod 

-      doD  A.  776-54O  B.C 38 

tii.n   li,  34O-480  B.l "I 

(II. \ll  ER    III 
The  1  11 1 11  <  1  ntory 

Period  of  Transition,  480-450  B.C 117 

l  ireal  Masters,  450-400  b.c 147 

CHAPTER  IV  . 
The  Fourth  Century 212 

CH  \ri  IK   V 

I  ill.    Hi  .   323-I46   B.l 247 

[OGRAFHT 2S1 

< 28a 


LIST    OF    ILLUSTRATIONS 


21. 
22. 

23- 
24. 

25> 
27. 

28. 
29. 
30- 
31- 
32- 


Nike  of  Samothrake.     Louvre 

1.  Gate,  with  Lionesses,  at  Mycenae     . 

2.  Vaphio  Cups.     Athens,  National  Museum 

3.  From  a  Bull-baiting  Scene.     Candia,  Crete 

4.  A  Harvest  Home  Procession.     Candia,  Crete 

5.  Apollo  of  Thera.     Athens,  National  Museum 

6.  Apollo  of  Melos.     Athens,  National  Museum 

7.  Apollo  of  Tenea.     Munich,  Glyptothek    . 

8.  Apollo  of  Orchomenos.     Athens,  National  Museum 

Torso  from  the  Ptoion.     Athens,  National  Museum 

Youth  from  the  Ptoion.     Athens,  National  Museum 

Statue  dedicated  by  Nikandre.     Athens,  National  Museum 

Head  from  the  Ptoion.     Athens,  National  Museum 

Seated  Statue  from  Branchidae.     British  Museum  , 

Reliefs  from  Assos.     Louvre 

Winged  Nike.     Athens,  National  Museum 

Archaic  Drum  of  Column  at  Ephesos.     British  Museum 

Samian  Hera.     Louvre    ....... 

Samian  Maiden.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum 

The  Dermys  and  Kitylos  Relief.     Athens,  National  Museum 


9- 
10. 
11. 
12. 

13- 

14. 

15- 
16. 

17. 

18. 

19- 


PAGE 

Frontispiece 

31 

32 

35 
37 
39 
39 
40 
40 

4i 

42 

43 

44 

45 
48 

51 

53 
54 
54 
55 
57 
59 
61 
62 
64 


20.    Typhon  from  the  Athenian  Akropolis.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum 
Calf-bearer.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum  .... 

Archaic  Head  of  Hera.     Olympia 

Archaic  Metope  from  Selinus.     Palermo  Museum    . 
Europa  on  a  Bull,  from  Selinus.     Palermo  Museum 
26.    Reliefs  from  the  Monteleone  Chariot.    New  York,  Metropolitan 

Museum        .......... 

Reliefs  from  an  Archaic  Bronze  Tripod.     In  the  possession  of  James 

Loeb    ........... 

Harpy  Monument,  West  Side.     British  Museum 

Archaic  Figure.     Athens,  Acropolis  Museum  .... 

Most  Elaborate  Archaic  Figure.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum 
Pathetic  Archaic  Figure.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum     . 
Finest  Type  of  Archaic  Figure.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum  . 


67 

69 

72 

75 

75 
76 

77 


10 


LIST   OF    ILLUSTRATIONS 


1 1 


FIG. 

It  toward  Simplicity.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum 
54.    Archaic  Youth  with  Yellow  Hair.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum 
K.    FlgUD    1   ulptured  by  Antenor.      Athens,  Akropolis  Museum 

36.  A  Youth  en  the  Athenian  Akropolis         .... 

37.  The  Rampin  Heal  at  Paris      ...... 

38.  Archaic  Horse.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum   . 

39.  Seated  Athena.      Athens,  Akropolis  Museum    . 

40.  Warrior  Athena.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum 

41.  Athena  accepting  Offerings.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum 

42.  Athena  striking  down  a  Youthful  <  iiant.    Athens,  Akropolis  Museum 

43.  Aristion's  Stele.      Athens,  National  Museum     . 

44.  Archaic  Discus-thrower.     Athens,  National  Museum 
4v  A  Boeotian  playing  with  His  Dog.     Athens,  National  Museum 

46.  Archaic    Relief  of  Warriors.      Delphi         .... 

47.  Quadriga.     Delphi  ....... 

48.  Battle  Scene.     Delphi 

49.  Archaic  Bronze  Head.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museu:n 

50.  Death  of  Aegisthos.     C  penhagen  Muse, mi 

51.  Hron/e  Statuette  from  Piombino.     1  ouvre 

52.  Archaic  Bronze  Head  from  Kythera.     Berlin  Museum     . 

53.  West  Gable  of  the  Temple  at  Aegina.     Munich,  Glyptothek 

54.  Central  (iroup  of  West  <  lable  at  Aegina  (Furtwfingler's  Restoration 

55.  Dying  Trojan  from  Aegina.     Munich,  Glyptothek    . 

56.  Bronze  Head.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum 

57.  Bronze  Heal  from  Herculaneuni.     Naples  Museum 

58.  Archaic  Bronze  Head  of  Zeus  from  Olympia    . 

59.  Harmodios  and  Aristogeiton.     Napl<  s  Mus  am 

60.  Delphic  Charioteer.     Delphi    ...... 

61.  East  and  West  Gable  Groups  a)  Olympia  1 

62.  Figure  from  I  asl  Gable.    Olympia  .... 

63.  Apollo,  Central  Figure  of  West  Gable.     Olympia 

Vthena  supporting  Herakles.     Olympia  .... 

65.  Zeus  and   Hera  on   Metope   oi    remple   E   at    Selinus.      Pa 

urn        ......... 

66.  Aphrodite  rising  fr>'in  the  Sea      Rome,  Museo  delle  \- 

67.  Head  of  Goddess.     Rome,  Museo  delli    rerme 

68.  So-called  Penelope.     Rome,  Vati  .... 

69.  Spinario.     Rome,  Capitoline  Museum 

70.  "  Apollo  "  of  the  Omphalos.      tthen«,  National  Museum 

71.  Myron's  Diskobolos.     Romi  >tti  Pals 


7" 

ga 

83 
84 

85 
86 

87 
89 
91 

93 

95 

97 

98 

98 

101 

102 

104 

105 

107 

no 

1 1 2 

114 

•15 

no 

119 
1  .'i 
125 

'-7 
129 

1  |6 

137 

1  |9 

1  |0 

142 
1  1 1 

'Is 

I  |o 


I2  LIST   OF   ILLUSTRATIONS 

FIG.  PAGE 

72.  Head  of  Idolino.     Florence,  Archaeological  Museum    .         .         .  152 

73.  Polykleitos'  Doryphoros.     Naples  Museum    .         .         .          .  155 

74.  Polykleitos'  Diadumenos.     British  Museum 1 57 

75.  Polykleitos'  Amazon.     Berlin  Museum 159 

76.  Lemnian  Athena.     Dresden  and  Bologna 163 

77.  Athena  Parthenos.     Athens,  National  Museum       ....  165 

78.  Lapith  and  Centaur  fighting.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum     .         -174 

79.  So-called  Theseus.     British  Museum 178 

80.  Group  of  so-called  Three  Sisters.     British  Museum         .         .  179 

81.  Horse's  Head  from  East  Gable  of  the  Parthenon.      British  Museum  181 

82.  West  Gable  of  the  Parthenon  (sketch  made  in  1674)     .         .         .  182 

83.  Parthenon  Frieze,  West  End.      {In  situ) 185 

84.  Horse  and  Man  on  West  Frieze  of  the  Parthenon.     {In  situ)         .  186 

85.  Poseidon,    Apollo,    and    Artemis    from    the    Parthenon.     Athens, 

Akropolis  Museum      .........  189 

86.  Sandal-binder  from  Balustrade  of  the  Temple  of  Nike.  Athens, 

Akropolis  Museum      .........  193 

87.  Karyatid  from  the  Erechtheion.     British  Museum  .         .         .197 

88.  Amazon  Relief  from  Phigaleia.     British  Museum   ....  200 

89.  Battle  between  Greeks  and  Amazons.     British  Museum  .         .  201 

90.  Triptolemos  between  Demeter  and  Kore.  Athens,  National  Museum  203 

91.  So-called  Mourning  Athena.     Athens,  Akropolis  Museum      .          .  204 

92.  Perikles.     British  Museum      ........  205 

93.  Nike  of  Paionios.     Olympia   . 206 

94.  Dexileos,  Grave  Relief.     Athens,  Dipylon       .....  208 

95.  Hegeso,  Grave  Relief.     Athens,  Dipylon        .....  209 

96.  Funereal  Relief  of  Father  and  Son.     Athens,  National  Museum     .  210 

97.  Two  Skopasian  Heads  from  Tegea.     Athens,  National  Museum     .  214 

98.  Goddess  from  South  Slope  of  Akropolis.    Athens,  National  Museum  216 

99.  Piece  of  Frieze  of  the  Mausoleum.     British  Museum 

100.  Sculptured  Drum  of  a  Column  from  Temple  at  Ephesos.     British 

Museum     . 

101.  Marble  Faun.     Rome,  Capitoline  Museum 

102.  Aphrodite  of  Knidos.     Rome,  Vatican   . 

103.  Hermes  of  Praxiteles.     Olympia 

104.  .Apollo   contending   with    Marsyas   in  Music 

Museum      ...... 

105.  Eubuleus.     Athens,  National  Museum   . 

106.  Demeter  of  Knidos.     British  Museum    . 

107.  Head  of  Asklepios  from  Melos.     Athens,  National  Museum  . 


Athens,  National 


217 

218 
220 
221 
223 

224 
226 

227 
228 


LIST    OF    ll.l.l>  l' RATIONS 


*3 


FIG. 

i    J,  v  Rome,  Vatican      ...... 

109.  Delphi 

;io.  Henn  of  Alexander.     Louvre         ...... 

11.  Hermes  resting  From  lii-<  Labours.     Naples  Museum 

12.  Bronze  Stal  .      I  a  Boy  in  Prayer.     Berlin  Museum 

13.  Choragic  Monument  of  Lysikrates.     Athens 

14.  Eirene  and  l'lut>».     Munich,  Glyptothek       .... 
lie.  Sarcophagus  of  the  Weeping  Women.     Constantinople  Museum 

in.  Alexander  Sarcophagus.     Constantinople  Museum 

17.  Nicliv-  protecting  her  Voungest  Daughter.    Florence,  Uffizi  Gallery 

18.  Themis  from  Rhamnus.     Athens,  National  Museum 

19.  Aphrodite  ol  Melos.     Louvre         ...... 

I20.  Head  from  Pergam  n      Berlin  Museum         .... 

[21.  Wounded  and  Dying  Gaul.     Rome,  Capitoline  Museum 

[22.  l'art  of  the  Frieze  of  the  Altar  at  Pergamon.     Berlin  Museum 

123.  Laocodn.     Rome,  Vatican      ....... 

124.  Farnese  Bull  Group.     Naples  Museum  ..... 
12;.  \  Ivedere.     Rome,  Vatican         ..... 

126.  Artemis  of  Versailles.     Louvre       ...... 

127.  Poseidon  Athens,  National  Museum 
Inytos  from  Lykosura,     Athens,  National  Museum 

1  2fl  Bronze  Youth  found  in  the  Sea  near  Antikythera.     Athens,  Nation! 
Museum      .......... 

130.  Ludovisi  Hera.     Rom.-,  Museo  delle  rerme  .... 

131.  So-called  Orestes  and  Electra.     Naples  Museum    . 


PAGB 

22') 
23O 
232 

235 
236 

238 

239 
241 

242 
248 

249 

251 

253 
255 
259 
263 
266 
268 
269 
272 
274 

*75 
278 

279 


INTRODUCTION 

Unquestionably  one  of  the  chief  claims  of  the  ancient  Greeks 

upon   the     attention    of   the     modern    world    is    their    sculpture. 

Schiller  well  selects  this  feature  as  their  principal  contribution  to 

civilization,  .saving  :  — 

I 
■•  I  in  edlea  Volk  hat  einst  gelebt 

k   nnte  die  Geschichte  davon  Bcbweigen, 

Taosend  Steine  wfirden  redend  ceugen, 

Die  man  aus  dem  Schooss  der  Erde  gr.il  >t." 

This  art  had.  however,  its  beginnings  in  attempts  which  often 
produced  only  the  grotesque.  It  is  interesting  to  trace  the  suc- 
cessive steps  by  which  it  slowly  proceeded  from  these  first  attempts 
to  the  glorious  creations  of  Pheidias,  and  then,  with  the  fading 
bloom  of  the  national  life,  moved  slowly  down  from  these  high 
ideals  to  realism,  portraiture,  and  still  more  common  themes. 
This  constitutes  the  history  of  Greek  Sculpture. 

In  this  history  the  period  just  before  and  some  time  after  the 
Age  of  Pheidias  is  by  many,  perhaps  by  the  majority  of  those  in- 
terested in  art,  considered  or  at  least  felt  to  be  more  interesting  than 
that  glorious  age  itself,  which  in  its  august  altitude  may  be  com- 
pared to  a  snow-covered  mountain  peak,  while  the  periods  before 
and  after  are  like  the  pleasant  slopes  where  one  loves  to  dwell. 
The  rude  beginnings  also  ami  the  ever  more  and  more  successful 
struggle    for   correct   expression   are    filll  Of  interest;   and   since  to 

.  historian  there  is  nothing  more  interesting  and  important 
than  origins,  this  field  of  archaic  sculpture  forms  a  large  part  of 
ever)  handbook  oi  sculpture.     The  last  pan  of  the  course-  is  also 

waste.     On  the  contrary,  it  is   sometimes 

paradox  thai  "the  mosl  interesting  sculpture  comes 

after  the  best  period";  and  in  very  truth  some  of  the  most  ad* 

ble  works  ( orae  alter  the  il  a  ulptors,  and  even  in  whal 

is  sometimes   loosely  spoken   of  as   the   age   "I    dei   idem  e.      Thus 

»5 


1 6  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

the  history  of  Greek  sculpture  arouses  unflagging  interest  from 
the  beginning  to  the  end. 

This  history  has  not  been  easily  compiled,  and,  after  all  the 
patient  and  brilliant  work  which  has  been  devoted  to  it,  is  still 
as  incomplete  as  some  of  the  torsos  that  furnish  its  subject-mat- 
ter. It  is  true  that  from  year  to  year  gaps  have  been  filled,  and 
each  new  handbook  or  each  new  edition  of  existing  handbooks 
marks  an  advance  on  its  predecessors.  This  is  largely  the  result 
of  modern  excavations,  which  have  in  the  last  three  decades  pro- 
duced new  material  so  rapidly  that  every  handbook  needs  re- 
editing  with  each  decade. 

But  after  all,  the  history  must  ever  remain  incomplete  from  the 
nature  of  the  material  with  which  it  deals,  viz.  (a)  the  sculptured 
remains  and  (b)  the  literary  sources  of  our  knowledge. 

(a)  The  destruction  of  ancient  statues  has  been  almost  com- 
plete, and  has  spared  neither  quantity  nor  quality.  There  were 
once,  if  we  can  trust  our  records,  in  60-70  a.d.,  after  Roman 
plundering  had  long  been  going  on,  three  thousand  statues  at 
Rhodes,  and  at  least  as  many  at  Athens,  Delphi,  and  Olympia. 
These  have  practically  all  disappeared.  Not  only  Pheidias,  but 
the  other  great  masters,  were  untiring  producers.  Lysippos,  for 
instance,  is  said  to  have  made  fifteen  hundred  statues,  every  one 
of  them  excellent  enough  to  have  made  him  famous ;  but  not  one 
of  them  survives.  There  is  a  probable  connection  of  Pheidias  with 
the  Parthenon  sculptures,  and  of  Skopas  with  the  gable  figures 
from  the  temple  at  Tegea.  But  we  have  only  the  Hermes  of 
Praxiteles  which  we  can  with  absolute  certainty  regard  as  an 
original  work  of  any  of  the  six  great  masters.  Bases  remain  in 
tantalizing  profusion  with  the  names  of  the  great  masters  in- 
scribed on  them.1 

1  Lowy,  Inschriften  griechischer  Bildhauer,  has  collected  these  as  far  as 
was  possible  at  the  time  of  the  publication  of  his  work.  Every  important 
excavation,  however,  brings  more  and  more  to  light.  The  excavations  at 
Corinth,  for  example,  brought  out,  in  1901,  two  bases  inscribed  with  the 
name  of  Lysippos.  But  many,  perhaps  the  greater  part  of  such  bases,  bear 
names  of  sculptors  who  are  not  mentioned  in  the  literary  records. 


INTRODUCTION  17 

Practi<  illy  then,  original  Greek  sculpture  no  longer  exists.  But 
before  the  masterpieces  perished  they  had  in  mam  cases,  by  their 
Hence,  incited  rich  Romans  to  procure  copies  of  them,  made 
by  more  or  less  skilful  workmen.  From  a  careful  study  of  these 
copies  there  has  been  evolved  in  modern  times  a  series  of  groups, 
which  with  more  or  less  positiveness  have  been  assigned  to  this  or 
that  master.  Thus  we  have"the  art  of  Polykleitos,"  "the  art  of 
Myron,"  and  so  on.1  <  !oins  also  have  proved  valuable  in  conveying 
an  idea  of  a  vanished  masterpiece  by  reproducing  a  famous  temple 
image  wholly  or  in  part.-'  Gems  also  have  rendered  a  like  service 
in  a  less  degree. 

(fi)  The  so-called  literary  sources  of  our  knowledge  of  Greek 
sculpture  are  for  the  most  part  highly  unsatisfactory.  The  Elder 
Pliny,  in  his  chapters  touching  on  the  History  of  Art,  gives  quite 
full  and  somewhat  systematic  information  about  Greek  sculptors, 
with  some  characterization  of  their  works.  But  a  close  examina- 
tion of  this  history  reveals  its  untrustworthiness.8  That  he  is  a 
borrower  four  or  five  times  removed  without  formally  acknowledg- 
ing his  indebtedness  is  somewhat  excusable  when  one  takes  into 
account  the  old  custom  of  literary  stealing  and  the  fact  that  he 
compose  1  these  chapters  as  a  sort  of  addendum  to  his  great  Natural 
History,  attaching  it  to  the  body  of  the  work  by  a  rather  artificial 
bond,  —  bronze  statuary,  for  example,  being  brought  in  as  com- 
pleting the  discussion  of  metals.  While  we  find  interesting  state- 
ments as  to  the  development  of  the  art  and  as  to  the  contributions 

'  Never  hai  this  pro< .  u  I"  en  1  arriol  farther  or  with  greater  acumen  than 
in  Furtwlngler'i  Ma  Urpieces. 

head  <>f  Zeus  on  ■  coin  ol  Flis,  Numismatu  Commentary,  Plate  /'. 

xxii;  coin*     1    Miletoa  with  ■  statu.-  of  Apollo,  Collignon,   Histoirt  <le  In 

tculpturt  grtcqut,  i.    512  f . ,  which   ihow   the   Piombino  and    Payru    Knight 

bronz4  reproduction!  "f  the  cultui  itatue   in  the  Branchidae  temple. 

famous  statm-  >>f  Aphrodite  of  Knidoi  is  in  like  manner  revealed  t>>  us. 

For  a     ireful  judgement  ••(  this  strange  and  interesting  compilation 

Blake  and  Seller*,    Tht   Eldet    Plin/i  Ckapttrs  on  Ha-  II.  Art. 

Still  later  appeared  Kalkmann,  IHe  QutUen  dtr  Km  ■        PliniuS. 

Sec  a]  hen,  26  f. 


18  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

made  by  the  several  great  sculptors,  these  are  like  a  few  grains  of 
wheat  among  bushels  of  chaff.  A  strong  bias  in  favour  of  Lysippos 
and  Xenokrates  of  Sikyon  pervades  the  whole.  In  Pliny's  chro- 
nology there  is  confusion  worse  confounded.  He  puts  Pythagoras 
after  Myron  and  both  after  Polykleitos,  and  brings  the  period  of 
the  bloom  of  Hagelaidas,  whom  he  makes  teacher  of  Myron  and 
Polykleitos,  down  to  the  beginning  of  the  Peloponnesian  War. 
He  knows  so  little  of  the  great  field  of  archaic  sculpture  that  one 
might  think  that  for  him  the  art  of  sculpture  began  with  Pheidias. 
And  yet  so  readable,  and  sometimes  so  racy,  is  his  story,  that 
we  can  forgive  him  for  yielding  to  the  desire  to  tell  in  his  opus 
magnum  something  which  all  polite  Romans  wished  to  hear.  The 
labour  of  several  distinguished  scholars  of  recent  times  has  made  it 
possible  to  use  the  art  section  of  the  work  intelligently,  and  now 
much  more  than  formerly  it  has  become  the  chief  ancient  literary 
authority  on  the  subject. 

Pausanias,  who  mentions  more  statues  than  any  other  ancient 
writer,  as  far  as  he  has  any  special  interest  in  the  subject,  is  con- 
cerned with  statues  distinguished  for  their  antiquity  or  sanctity. 
He  is  satisfied  if  he  can  make  them  serve  as  the  basis  for  the 
relation  of  religious  or  mythological  yarns.  It  is  useless  to  seek 
for  any  art  criticism  or  history  from  him.  He  usually  fails  us  just 
where  we  wish  for  information  ;  and  yet  we  owe  him  an  immense 
debt  of  gratitude  for  his  short  descriptions  of  the  Athena  Par- 
thenos  at  Athens  and  of  the  Zeus  at  Olympia.  Lucian,  undoubt- 
edly the  best  art  critic  of  all  the  ancient  writers  who  have  spoken 
of  sculpture  and  sculptors,  unfortunately  touches  the  subject  only 
casually.  He  could  undoubtedly  have  written  a  fine  history  of 
sculpture  ;  but  he  never  thought  of  doing  so. 

The  other  so-called  literary  sources  afford  only  such  casual  and 
fragmentary  information  that  they  are  hardly  worth  taking  into 
this  summary  account.  Dion  Chrysostom,  Quintilian,  and  Plu- 
tarch might  be  mentioned ;  but  when  one  begins  with  these, 
one  hardly  knows  where  to  stop.  All  the  gleanings  of  scraps  of 
information    or  misinformation  given  in  ancient  writers  may  be 


INTRODU*   HON  19 

seen  in  Overberk, .-//.///(•<••  SchrifiqueUen  tur  Geschichk  der  bilden- 
</< n  Kiinste  bei  Jen  Griechtn. 

A  brief  description  of  the  maten.il>  used  and  of  the  processes 
employed  in  Greek  sculpture  may  seem  in  place  here  for  the  sake 
of  completeness,  even  it  it  is  nothing  more  than  a  repetition  of 
what  has  already  been  said  in  other  handbooks.' 

Wood  may  have  been  for  a  long  period  almost  exclusively  the 
material  of  (Ireek  sculpture;  and  long  after  bronze  and  marble 
had  supplanted  it  in  general  use,  it  still  continued  to  be  employed 
in  certain  cases.  The  wooden  statues-  which  Pausanias  saw  at 
Corinth,  gilded  all  over  except  on  the  face,  which  was  smeared 
with  red  paint,  were  doubtless  made  in  recent  times  in  continuance 
of  an  old  custom.  The  climate  of  (Ireece,  unlike  that  of  Egypt, 
which  by  its  dryni  ss  his  preserved  to  the  present  clay  many  choice 
specimens  of  wooden  sculpture  of  far  greater  antiquity,  early  de- 
stroyed those  produced  in  dreece. 

That  wooden  sculpture  did  not  die  with  the  introduction 
of  marble  and  bronze  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  in  an  inscription 
troin  Delos  of  2-(>  u.c  .  mention  is  made  of  a  wooden  statue  of 
Dionysos  which  was  fabricated  every  year  for  his  festival/'  The 
prevalence  of  sculpture  in  wood  in  the  earliest  times  is  thought  to 
be  proved  by  the  fact  that  when  sculpture  in  stone  came  into 
ie  in  the  seventh  century  B.C.,  it  not  only  often  showed  forms 
appropriate  to  wood  carving,  but  also  betrayed  everywhere  the 
habits  and  the  use  of  tools  such  as  belonged  to  workers  in  wood/ 

That  wood  found  application  even  in  c  .irved  relief  is  seen  from 
the  description  of  the  Chest  <>t  Kypselos.      Moreover,  since  inser- 

'  I  ^r  a  liricf  treatment  <>(  the  -  Gardner1!  Handbook  of  C><-fk 

S(ulptutf,  15  f     For  Fuller  information  one  may  consult  Blumner,  Teekn 

trminologii   :■>  1  twerbt  und KUnstt  bti  Griechtn  und  Jfdmern,  iii  and 
iv,  passim, 

1   .r  the  ate   "f  the-  word  {6aeoc   in    Pauaaniai  as   al«.i\^   meaning  a 
■•n  ttatut  .   •■  ■    Frazet  on  Paus.   1 .   ;.  5. 
•B.C.//.  14     '' 

4  I  ot    \ili'  na,  see  1  k.  17  (1891),  304  f,  and  later,    tu 

bin    *  ■■"  ■  PAthhus,  13  f.  6  1'auN.  5.  17.  5  f 


20  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

tion  of  gold  and  ivory  was  practised,  we  have  here  the  beginning 
of  chryselephantine  statuary.  Wooden  sculpture  was  doubtless 
somewhat  roughly  hewn,  since  the  paint  was  laid  on  thickly.  In 
the  case  of  the  statue  from  Delos  above  referred  to,  the  painter 
was  paid  as  much  as  the  carver.  Since,  however,  we  have  no  re- 
mains whatever  of  this  wooden  sculpture,  we  may  turn  to  sculpture 
in  stone  and  bronze. 

The  mention  of  Greek  sculpture  calls  up  in  the  minds  of  most 
people  a  picture  of  white  marble,  whose  effect  is  due  only  to  form, 
and  which  leaves  on  the  beholder  an  impression  of  coldness. 
But  bronze  was  in  the  great  days  of  art  much  the  most  common 
material.  Pliny,  after  giving  a  list  of  five  great  sculptors,  includ- 
ing Pythagoras,1  brings  in  Praxiteles  by  way  of  supplement,  re- 
marking that  he  worked  mostly  in  marble.  Praxiteles  did  work 
somewhat  in  bronze.  Pheidias  and  Skopas  divided  their  attention 
between  the  two  materials,  working  less  in  bronze  toward  the  end 
of  their  careers.  But  Lysippos,  Polykleitos,  and  Myron  worked 
almost  exclusively  in  bronze.  Not  only  athletic  statues  but  most 
of  the  other  figures  which  thronged  the  great  centres  of  athletics 
and  religion,  standing  out  in  the  open  air,  were  of  bronze.  This 
composition,  made  of  copper  and  tin,  mixed  in  varying  pro- 
portions, with,  it  is  said,  occasional  additions  of  the  more  pre- 
cious metals,  gold  and  silver,  had  many  varieties,  which  were 
named  from  the  places  where  they  were  manufactured,  rather  than 
from  the  mines  whence  their  constituents  were  obtained.  Corin- 
thian bronze  was  the  general  favourite  ;  and  according  to  Pausanias 
got  its  peculiar  quality  from  being  dipped  when  red-hot  into  the 
fountain  Peirene.2  Delian  and  Aeginetan  were  said  to  be  the 
favourites  of  Myron  and  Polykleitos  respectively.  Argive  and 
Corinthian  reliefs,  so  frequent  in  the  archaic  period,  were  pre- 
sumably of  Corinthian  bronze.  But  no  analysis  has  been  able 
to  establish  local  distinctions.  Chalkis,  which  is  said  to  have  got 
its  name  from  its  great  copper  industries,  is  strangely  omitted  in 
the  reports  concerning  localities  where  bronze  was  produced; 
1  Pliny,  34.  69.  2  Paus.  2.  3.  3. 


INTRODUCTION  21 

and  copper  mines  in  its  neighbourhood  do  not  seem  to  be  well 
authenticated.1  Cyprus  was  always  the  great  copper-producing 
region  most  accessible  to  the  Greeks.  Besides  the  archaic  re- 
liefs just  mentioned,  very  primitive  bronze  statuettes  have  been 
found  in  many  parts  of  Greece,  and  notably  at  Olympia,  which 
go  back  to  a  very  early  period. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  seventh  century  there  was  a  great  advance 
in  the  skill  of  bronze  workers.  Out  of  this  fact  probably  came 
the  story  that  the  Simians,  Theodoros  and  Rhoikos,  who  may  be 
put  in  the  beginning  of  the  next  century,  invented  bronze-casting. 
Since,  however,  bronze-casting  was  known  in  Egypt  many  cen- 
turies before  this  time,  the  story  may  be  interpreted  to  mean  that 
these  Samians  learned  casting  from  Egypt,  perhaps  through  the 
Samian  colony  at  Naukratis,"  and  transmitted  it  to  Samos. 

At  any  rate,  at  about  this  time  bronze  statuary  in  the  true  sense 
appeared  all  over  Greece.  A  statue  of  Zeus,  which  was  put  to- 
gether by  hammering  plates  of  bronze  into  shape  and  then  rivet- 
ing them,  was  long  shown  at  Sparta,  purporting  to  have  been  made 
by  Klearchos  of  Rhegion,  who  was  probably  a  contemporary  of 
the  two  Simians.  If  this  was  not  an  anachronism  to  start  with, 
it  must  at  least  soon  have  become  a  curiosity. 

Bronze  statues,  which  now  came  into  vogue,  were  sometimes, 
though  rarely,  cast  solid.  Hut  as  this  consumed  a  great  amount 
ol  metal,  which,  on  account  of  the  difficulty  of  obtaining  it,  was 
always  of  considerable  value,  it  was  the  custom  to  make  the  statue 
hollow  and  as  thin  as  was  consistent  with  durability.  Of  the  vari- 
ous methods  adopted,  the  simplest  was  the  cire  perdue.  Over  a 
fireproof  core  large  enough  nearly  to  till  the  completed  statue  a 
Coating  of  wax,  as  thick  as  the  intended  casting,  was  carefully 
laid.  This  was  modelled  in  detail  (which  because  of  its  pliable 
surface  was  easy),  and  had  th(  C  of  the  statue  that  was  to  be; 

f.r  over  it  was  laid  another  fireproof  coating  which  we  may  1  all 

the  mould,  the  first  layers  being  ■>!  very  tine  clay  laid  on  with  a 

1  1 1  named  up  in  Blfimner,  iv.  38. 

■  Nauk  rt  it  59. 


22  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

brush ;  and  then  followed  coarser  clay.  When  the  molten  metal 
was  poured  in  between  these  fireproof  walls,  it  melted  out  the 
wax  and  took  its  place ;  and  the  statue  was  done. 

Sometimes,  perhaps,  as  at  the  present  time,  the  core  itself  was 
carefully  wrought,  and  a  mould  was  made  upon  it  of  the  thickness 
of  the  intended  statue.  The  mould  was  then  taken  off  in  pieces  and 
a  thin  coating  of  wax  pressed  into  its  hollows.  Then  a  new  core 
was  made  ;  the  hollow  pieces  of  the  mould,  with  the  wax  inside, 
being  laid  upon  it.  The  wax  was  then  driven  out  by  the  molten 
bronze  which  came  in  between  the  core  and  the  mould.1  The 
mould,  being  in  two  or  more  pieces,  could  be  used  repeatedly. 
The  core  in  each  case  could  be  broken  up,  and  as  many  statues  as 
were  required  could  be  made  from  the  same  mould.  But  in  the 
best  days  of  Greece  statues  were  probably  seldom  duplicated. 
That  statues  were  cast  in  parts  is  evident  from  a  vase  of  the  fifth 
century,2  which  shows  a  bronze  statue  with  the  head  missing  and 
hand  and  foot  hanging  on  the  wall.  Eye  sockets  were  left  hollow 
and  filled  in  with  glass,  metal,  etc.,  the  colour  of  different  parts 
being  imitated.3  Whatever  the  difference  in  processes,  it  is  certain 
that  the  moderns  have  never  equalled  the  perfect  finish  of  Greek 
bronzes.  Their  beauty,  however,  did  not  save  them  from  destruc- 
tion. The  material  being  valuable  to  barbarians,  especially  for 
weapons,  bronzes  speedily  found  their  way  by  the  wholesale  into 
crucibles. 

Side  by  side  with  bronze,  stone  was  employed  for  statues.  The 
natural  successor  of  wood,  if  wood  was  really  exclusively  used  in 
the  earliest  times,  was  soft  stone  ;  and,  in  Attika  at  least,  that 
material  was  used  before  marble.     Peiraeus  stone,  called  by  the 

1  Bliimner,  iv.  325  f.  That  the  latter  process  was  the  one  employed 
by  Polykleitos  may  be  inferred  from  his  well-known  saying,  XaXewwrarov 
t6  epyov  Srav  iv  6wx<-  0  irrj\6s.  Of  the  cire  perdzie  process  he  would  have 
said  KrjpSs  and  not  7tt/X6s. 

2  Baumeister,  Denkm'dler  des  klassischen  Altertums,  i.  506,  Fig.  547. 

3  This  is  seen  in  the  Charioteer  from  Delphi  (p.  121)  and  the  large 
bronze  from  Antikythera   (p.  275). 


INTRODUCTION  23 

ancients  ruptyos  At'#os\  was  at  hand  in  abundance,  and  was  gen- 
erally employed  in  the  architectural  sculpture  of  Athens  until  well 
00  into  the  sixth  century.  On  this,  colour  was  laid  with  an  unspar- 
ing hand.  The  gables  of  temples  erected  on  the  Akropolis  before 
the  time  of  PeisistratOS  are  the  most  notable  examples  of  this 
practice. 

But  when  with  improved  tools  it  was  once  found  possible  to 
carve  marble,  this  easily  and  quickly  supplanted  all  other  kinds  of 
stone.  Long  before  Athens  had  taken  this  step  the  islanders, 
making  a  virtue  of  necessity,  had  made  use  of  the  harder  material. 
But  because  marble  statues  are  now  more  abundant  than  others, 
one  must  not  forget  that  this  was  not  the  case  from  the  beginning. 
Marble  statues  have  survived  in  much  larger  quantity  than  those 
made  of  bronze,  because  marble  was  less  valuable  to  the  barbarians, 
who  melted  up  masterpieces  in  bronze  to  make  weapons  and  other 
implements.  Hence  many  a  famous  original  of  bronze  is  repre- 
sented to  us  only  by  some  1  opy  or  series  of  copies  in  marble  ;  for 
example,  the  Diadumenos  of  Polykleitos.  But  many  good  marble 
statues  found  their  way  into  lime-kilns  simply  because  they  lay 
conveniently  near  at  hand. 

N  xos  and  Paros,  lying  side  by  side  in  the  middle  of  the 
in,  had  excellent  kinds  of  marble.  Paros  had  one  quarry 
running  deep  into  the  heart  of  Mt.  Marpessa,  from  which  came  the 
marble  which  most  sculptors  preferred.  It  was  called  fychnites 
because,  it  is  said,  it  was  quarried  by  the  light  of  lamps  (Au^os). 
The  other  quarries  of  ParOS  yielded  marble  much  like  that  of  other 

islands,  notably  Naxos.  Hence,  the  non-committal  name  of  island 
marble  is  much  in  vogue.  N  ixian  marble  shaped  by  Naxian 
sculptors  is  found  not  only  in  Naxos,  but  in  regions  as  remote 
rnoSj  Boeotia,  and  Akarnania.1  Naxian  Bculptora  were  active 
m  Delos,  makii  issal  statues  in  Naxian  marble  in  the  early 

part  of  the  sixth  1  entury.  In  this  century  the  <  Ihian  artists  brought 
Parian  marble  to  honour  ovei  a  «ride  area.  The  large  numbei  oi 
female  statues  set  up  on  the  Vkropolis  at  Athens  at  this  tune  were 

1  M.uiiM.ri.uiist,  in  Atk.  Mitt   1      1892),  37  £ 


24  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

of  Parian  marble.  Reliefs,  however,  of  the  same  time  were  usu- 
ally made  of  Pentelic  marble.  In  the  Calf-bearer,  Hymettos 
marble  was  used.  This  was  poor  bluish  marble,  and  never  gained 
much  favour.  In  Attika  during  the  fifth  century  Pentelic  marble 
became  the  general  favourite.  The  Parthenon  sculptures,  as  well  as 
the  building  itself,  were  made  of  it.  But  in  the  next  century  came 
a  return  to  Parian ;  Praxiteles  would  use  no  other.  Although  it 
was  coarser  grained  than  Pentelic,  it  had  a  warm  semi-transparent 
surface.  But  even  one  who  has  a  good  acquaintance  with  marbles 
cannot  always  readily  distinguish  between  these  two. 

The  only  marble  quarries  known  in  the  Peloponnesos  are  those 
at  Doliana,  near  Tegea.  Doliana  marble  was  poor  and  dull  com- 
pared with  Pentelic  and  Parian  ;  but  sculptors  in  that  part  of  Greece 
often  preferred  to  put  up  with  this  poorer  marble  rather  than  trans- 
port their  material  over  a  long  distance.  The  figures  from  the 
gable  of  the  great  temple  at  Tegea  are  made  of  it,  although  created 
by  Skopas,  who  preferred  Parian.  The  Romans  in  Greece  showed 
a  strong  preference  for  Parian  marble,  most  of  the  sculpture  found 
in  the  excavations  at  Corinth  from  the  later  city,  for  example,  being 
Parian.  The  Romans  were  also  very  fond  of  various  red  and  green 
marbles,  found  in  different  parts  of  Greece  ;  green  (cipollino),  notably 
but  not  exclusively  in  Thessaly  and  Euboea,  and  red  (rosso  antico) 
in  Mt.  Tainaron  to  the  south  of  Sparta. 

The  processes  and  tools  of  the  sculptor  in  marble  were  not  unlike 
those  in  vogue  to-day.  A  pointed  chisel  for  the  first  rough  work ; 
then  edged  chisels,  toothed  chisels,  and  rasps.1  It  is  often  noticed 
as  a  sign  of  the  lack  of  perfect  finish  that  traces  of  the  toothed 
chisel  have  not  been  entirely  obliterated.  The  use  of  the  drill  is 
said  by  Pausanias  to  have  been  introduced  by  Kallimachos ;  but 
this  is  as  far  from  the  truth  as  possible,  inasmuch  as  traces  of  the 
use  of  the  drill  go  back  at  least  to  the  pediment  sculptures  at 
Olympia  and  even  to  those  of  Aegina. 

There  are  unfinished  statues  in  various  stages  of  incompleteness. 

1  For  the  forms  in  use  among  modern  marble  workers,  see  Blumner,  iii. 
194,  Fig.  24. 


INTRODUCTION  25 

(  me  of  these,1  from  the  island  of  Naxos,  is  a  good  example  of  pro- 
cesses. It  has  hardly  gone  beyond  the  stage  where  the  pointed 
chisel  or  punch  was  the  only  instrument  required.    It  appears  that 

the  workman  drove  his  punch  with  great  freedom  by  blows  of  the 
hammer,  unless  it  was  perhaps  a  pointed  hammer  that  did  most  of 
the  work.  He  seems  to  have  first  sketched  out  on  a  rectangular 
block  the  breadth  and  thickness  of  his  figure  by  drawing  hues  on 
the  front  and  one  of  the  sides,  and  to  have  started  from  these  lines 
to  cut  straight  into  the  block.  But  for  some  reason  he  stopped 
when  he  had  got  just  far  enough  to  produce  some  semblance  to  a 
human  figure.  There  was  found  at  the  new  English  quarries  near 
Ikaria  a  block  like  the  one  from  Naxos,  except  that  the  forming 
process  had  not  proceeded  quite  so  fir.  It  had  gone  just  far 
enough  to  allow  us  to  recognize  a  figure  of  the  "archaic  Apollo" 
type,  a  male  figure  with  the  left  foot  advanced  ami  arms  pressed 
close  to  the  hips.  The  use  of  a  (lay  model  in  making  such  early 
statues  is  hardly  supposable;  but  there  have  been  observed  on 
some  unfinished  statues  of  a  later  date,  usually  copies,  puntelli* 
which  imply  working  from  such  a  model.  There  is,  for  example, 
one  on  the  Massimi  I  liskobolos  in  the  hair  just  above  the  forehead. 
•  it  i>  probable  that  in  the  fifth  century  there  were  sculptors 
with  methods  like  those  of  Michelangelo,  who  attacked  his  block 
with  mallet  and  chisel,  making  the  chips  tlv  as  if  he  felt  that  there 
am-  imprisoned  in  it  and  that  he  musl  set  it  free  Perhaps 
this  was  the  common  practice.  The  sculptor  had  more  opportu- 
nity then  to  be  "nil-  perfectly  familiar  with  living  models  than 
the  sculptor  of  to-day.  Hence  the  confidence  and  inspiration  of 
the  (ireek. 


1  Gardner,  Creek  Sculpture,  p.  21. 

ihould   striitly  designate   tin-   nails  which   were  employed  to 

transfer  Hunts   from    the   clay    model    to   the    marble   statue. 

Hut  tin-  word  is  lo  *ely  used  to  d<  also  the  knob  thai  is  left  around 

irfa  ■•   is   chiselled    clown,     These    kin. lis    remain,   <>( 

C"ur-.< ,  '  ni.  have  ti"t  received  the  finishing  tout  b. 


26  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

PAINTING   APPLIED   TO    SCULPTURE 

The  question  that  was  seriously  discussed  less  than  half  a  cen- 
tury ago,  whether  Greek  statues  were  painted,  has  now  been  re- 
placed by  another  form  of  the  question,  viz.  how  they  were 
painted.  In  the  case  of  wooden  statues  ($6ava)  there  could 
never  be  any  doubt.  The  sculptures  in  soft  limestone  (poros) 
found  on  the  Akropolis  at  Athens,  dating  back  to  the  seventh 
century,  are  seen  to  be  as  thoroughly  painted  as  any  wooden 
statues  could  be.  The  gable  groups,  including  the  famous  "  Blue- 
beard "  group  from  the  oldest  Athena  temple,  by  no  means  the 
oldest  of  the  series,  have  the  paint  laid  on,  as  it  were,  with  a 
trowel.  The  original  base  material  was  entirely  hidden  by  the 
coating.  The  favourite  colours  were  red  and  blue.  Since  the  back- 
ground of  the  gables  was,  certainly  in  the  case  of  the  Hydra  gable, 
and  probably  in  the  others  also,  of  a  neutral  tint,  the  groups  stood 
out  in  strong  relief,  like  figures  on  black-figured  vases.  In  the 
course  of  the  sixth  century  came,  with  the  introduction  of  red- 
figured  vases,  an  inversion  of  this  principle.  Not  only  on  vases 
did  light  figures  appear  on  a  dark  background,  but  gable  figures 
also  stood  out  in  the  same  manner. 

In  the  great  period  of  art  inaugurated  by  Peisistratos  and  his 
sons,  when  Parian  and  other  island  marble  succeeded  poros,  paint 
was  still  applied  on  the  figures,  but  with  considerable  reserve  and 
discretion.  Some  regard  was  given  to  the  better  material.  In 
the  great  gable  of  the  enlarged  Athena  temple,  in  which  a  battle 
of  gods  and  giants  was  represented,  the  bodies  had  none  of  the 
old  bizarre  colouring.  It  is  only  the  accessories,  the  borders  of 
garments,  the  hair,  eyes,  lips,  that  are  so  accentuated.  This  is 
true  also  of  the  large  series  of  female  votive  statues.  The  ex- 
cavations on  the  Athenian  Akropolis  in  1 886-1 890  put  a  stop 
to  all  questioning  of  the  principle  of  painting  marble  statues  in 
the  archaic  period,  down  even  to  the  Persian  War.  Here  some 
were  inclined  to  throw  up  breastworks  and  say,  "  Thus  far  and  no 
farther."     The  idea  of  Pheidias  painting  his  statues  was  repug- 


INTRODUCTION  27 

nam  ;  and  if  colouring  was  to  be  applied,  why  should  one  choose 
the  finest  kinds  of  Pentelic  and  even  the  transparent  Parian 
marble?  Bat  strong  battalions  of  evidence  have  carried  the  whole 
line  of  resistance  before  them.     No  one  can  read  a  summing  up 

of  the  evidence  without  surrendering  to  it  absolutely  and  com- 
pleted}-.1 Even  the  nude  parts  were  not  left  white  and  cold. 
Praxiteles  said  that  his  best  statues  were  those  that  were  touched 
up  by  the  painter  Nikias.  This  can  hardly  be  taken  to  mean 
anything  else  than  that  the  whole  surface  was  covered  by  some 
sort  of  unobtrusive  colouring  ;  and  the  investigation  of  the  statues 
themselves  shows  abundant  corroboration  of  the  fact.  The 
ancients  seem  to  have  felt  that  pure  white  marble  was  too  bril- 
liant, and  needed  toning  down.  This  toning  was  doubtless  that 
referred  to  in  several  ancient  writers  as  ganosis.  The  application 
of  stronger  and  weaker  shades  of  colour  continued  down  into  late 
Roman  tim 

But  after  having  ai  repted  the  fai  t.  one  may  still  feel  less  respect 
for  Greek  taste  than  he  had  before  this  knowledge  was  thrust  upon 
him.  The  horrible  cheapness  of  a  waxwork  collection  will  rise 
before  one's  vision.  But  in  this  matter  we  must  trust  to  the  taste 
of  a  people  that  has  given  such  abundant  proof  of  correct  feeling. 
We  must  also  remember  that  the  great  gold  and  ivory  statues 
of  Pheidias,  the  perfect  flower  of  Creek  statuary,  afforded  the 
•  p.wning  example  of  the  application  of  colour.  If,  however,  one 
should  reply.  "  I  low  do  I  know  that  we  should  have  approved  of 
these  statues?"  we  can  refer  him  to  the  Alexander  sarcophagus, 
which  silences  every  suspicion  of  bad  taste. 

1  he  history  of  Greek  sculpture  is  so  long  a  story  that  it  must  be 

divided    into   chapters.      These    chapters   are    naturally    limited    by 

chronological  lines.     It  will,  however,  be  well  understood  that  in 
this  constantly  flowing  stream  no  hard  and  fast  dividing  lines  can 
tablished.     Perhaps  no  better  division  <  an  be  made  than  the 
foUowin  not  aim  al  fine  distin<  tion 

llignon,  I.a  poh'chromie  dan  rue 

2  It  must  t>c  frankly  I  thai  we  have  nothing  ol  importance  t"  iill 


28  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

1.  Oldest  Period.  From  the  earliest  undatable  beginnings 

to  776  B.C.    (First  Olympiad.) 

2.  Archaic  Period.        From  776  to  480  B.C.    (Persian  War.) 

(a)    776-540  B.C. 
(6)    540-480  B.C. 

3.  Blooming  Period.       Fifth  Century. 

(a)    Period  of  Transition,  480-450  B.C. 
(£)    Bloom,  450-400  B.C. 

4.  Second  Bloom.  Fourth  Century. 

5.  Hellenistic  Period.     From  the    death  of  Alexander  to   the 

Destruction  of  Corinth,  323-146  B.C. 

Classified  as  to  its  purposes  sculpture  maybe  divided  as  follows  :  — 

1.  Architectural  Sculpture.  The  most  imposing  use  is  in  gables. 
Metopes  and  friezes  were  also  important  decorations.  Single 
figures  and  even  groups  were  placed  oh  the  apex  of  the  gable,  on 
the  corners  of  the  building,  or  on  both. 

2.  Cultus  Statues.  Every  temple  naturally  contained  one  such 
statue.  At  Mantineia  there  was  a  group  of  Leto  and  her  children. 
From  the  temple  of  Despoina,  at  Lykosura,  we  have  considerable 
remains  of  such  a  group  preserved. 

3.  Votive  Offerings,  anathemata.  The  archaic  statues  from 
the  Athenian  Akropolis,  mostly  female,  the  vast  quantity  of  athletic 
statues  at  Olympia,  Delphi,  and  other  athletic  centres,  are  cases  in 
point.  The  donor  sometimes  wished  to  represent  himself  as  ever 
standing  in  the  presence  of  the  divinity.  He  would  therefore 
set  up  a  figure  of  the  divinity,  that  the  god  or  goddess  might  take 
delight  in  it.  This  was  called  an  ayaX/jLa.  Votive  reliefs  form  a 
large  part  of  this  class. 

4.  Grave  Monuments.  These  in  early  times  were  composed  of 
a  single  figure,  usually  in  relief,  e.g.  the  Aristion  stele.  After  the 
sixth  century,  groups  became  more  and  more  common  in  the 
reliefs.     In  the  fifth  and  fourth  centuries  there  were  at  Athens 

the  great  void  between  the  Mycenaean  civilization,  which  came  to  an  end 
about  1 100  B.C.,  and  that  of  the  rugged  Greeks  who  climbed  by  slow  degrees 
to  power  and  culture. 


INTRODUCTION  29 

very  fine  monuments  of  this  class.  It  is  sometimes  difficult  to 
distinguish  sepulchral  from  votive  reliefs.  The  relief  from  Chrys- 
apha  ne.tr  Spirt. 1,  for  example,  might   be  assigned  to  either  class. 

5.  Honorary  Statins.  Examples  of  these  occur  from  Har- 
moilios  and  Aristogeiton  to  Demetrios  of  Phaleron,  who  is  said  to 
have  had  over  three  hundred  statues  erected  to  him   in   his  short 

ne  of   about    a    year    at    Athens.      The    Diadochoi    and    the 
Caesars  took  tip  this  custom   with  enthusiasm. 

6.  Simply  Ornamental  Sculpture.  This  class  was  especially 
popular  in  the  Hellenistic  period.  See  Schreiber,  HettenisHsche 
ReUefbilder. 


CHAPTER    I 

OLDEST    OR   MYCENAEAN    PERIOD 

Histories  of  Greek  art  written  a  generation  ago  now  look 
obsolete,  mainly,  but  not  entirely,  because  of  the  accumulation  of 
new  material  for  this  period.  One  had  always  read,  in  the  Homeric 
poems,  of  wonderful  pieces  of  art,  —  the  Shield  of  Achilles,  for  ex- 
ample, and  the  palaces  of  Menelaos  and  Alkinoos.  But  since 
one  heard  also  of  gold  and  silver  dogs  that  guarded  the  palace  of 
Alkinoos  and  golden  boys  holding  candlesticks  before  the  palace, 
it  was,  naturally  enough,  customary  to  regard  these  objects  as 
existing  only  in  the  fancy  of  the  poet.  The  wonder-working 
Daidalos  went  into  the  same  category. 

One  substantial  memorial  of  the  oldest  period,  however,  survived  : 
two  rampant  lionesses 1  over  the  main  gate  of  the  citadel  of  My- 
cenae (Fig.  i).  But  they  led  to  nothing;  they  were  solitary.  In 
1876  Schliemann  passed  through  the  gate,  and  discovered  in  an 
ancient  cemetery  traces  of  an  imposing  civilization  which  scien- 
tific archaeologists  are  still  studying.  He  fondly  thought  that  he 
had  discovered  the  body  of  Agamemnon,  and  was  at  first  derided 
by  scholars  for  supposing  that  he  had  found  anything  so  old  as 
that.  But  it  has  been  proved  that  this  cemetery  is  much  older 
than  the  time  of  Agamemnon,  and  that  the  greatness  and  brilliancy 
of  this  period  was  only  inadequately  set  forth  in  the  Homeric 
poems.  Although  immediately  after  the  excavation  of  this  ceme- 
tery traces  of  the  same  civilization  kept  coming  to  light  all  over 
the  Aegean  basin,  nowhere  else  in  that  area  was  such  a  quantity 
of  objects  of  art  in  gold  of  the  period  unearthed.  Substantial 
masks  beaten  into  such  shape  as  to  represent  roughly  the  features 
of  the  dead  whose  faces  they  covered,  diadems,  bracelets,  goblets, 

1  They  may  be  lionesses.     The  heads  are  gone. 
3° 


01  I'l  -I     OR    MM  EN  MAN    PERIOD  31 

make  only  a  small  part  of  the  inventory.     The  contents  of  the  six 
pit  graves  mike  it  quite  certain  that  considerable  intervals  of  time 


m     M 

Sv 

^jfl 

■J.  •  ^EBflife            ?» 

Fie.   1       1  laie,  « nil  I  ai  Mj  1  cnae. 

■  evened  between  su<  1  essivi     •       .  and  also  between  su<  1  essive 

ils  in  any  our  of  the  Kr'lw'^-     The  whole  period  of  interments 

could  hardly  be  less  than  hall  a  century,  and  was  probably  much 


32 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


longer.  No  tradition  of  these  buried  dead  has  come  down  to  us. 
The  great  beehive  tombs,  later  than  these  pit  graves,  and  the 
stateliest  buildings  of  the  period,  would  doubtless  have  afforded  a 
higher  estimate  of  the  art  of  Mycenae  had  they  not  long  ago  been 
rifled  of  their  contents.  In  them  we  should  probably  have  found 
the  bodies  of  the  Pelopid  monarchs,  with  treasures  of  art  appro- 
priate to  the  mightiest  dynasty  of  Mycenae. 


Fig.  2.  —  Vaphio  Cups.     (Athens,  National  Museum.) 


From  the  place  where  the  first  great  discovery  of  objects  of  art 
of  this  period  was  made  it  has  been  customary  to  call  them  all 
"  Mycenaean,"  whether  found  in  Attika,  Boeotia,  or  Thessaly. 
The  choicest  gold  objects  of  the  period  hitherto  discovered  in 
Greece  come  not  from  Mycenae  itself  but  from  a  beehive  tomb  at 
Vaphio,  the  ancient  Amyklai,  near  Sparta.  From  a  grave  in  the 
floor  of  this  tomb  came  in  1889  two  gold  cups  (Fig.  2),  placed  at 
the  right  and  left  hands  of  a  body  already  decayed.  These  cups 
are  ornamented  in  repousse^  on  a  band  nearly  three  inches  broad, 
the  figures  being  about  half  an  inch  high.  The  ornament  is  on  an 
outer  cup,  over  which  an  inner  lining  is  folded  at  the  upper 
edge.     A  single  handle  at  the  top  is  fastened   by  three  rivets. 


OLDEST   OR    MYCENAEAN    PERIOD  33 

The  decoration  gives  two  companion  scenes.  One  is  a  bull-hunt 
in  a  wooded  country.  Two  hunters,  dressed  in  the  usual  loin- 
cloth and  pointed  shoes,  .ire  being  roughly  treated  by  a  bull  which 
has  already  tossed  one  hunter,  now  falling  to  the  ground,  and  is  in 
the  act  of  goring  the  second  to  death.  To  the  right  of  this  group 
is  a  bull  caught  in  a  net  bound  to  two  trees,  one  of  which  he  has 
wrenched  from  the  groUnd  by  his  struggles.  In  his  contorted  po- 
sition he  seems  about  to  perform  the  impossible  feat  of  bringing 
his  hind  legs  down  astride  of  his  horns.  It  is  quite  evident  that  he 
will  escape.  The  third  bull,  free  from  all  trammels,  rushes  off  to 
the  right  through  trees  or  what  may  be  taken  to  be  trees.  The 
two  trees  to  which  the  net  is  bound  might  from  their  relative  si/e 
properly  be  called  bushes  ;  and  the  bull  might  be  supposed  to 
uproot  them  easily.  In  fact,  the  trees  were  probably  put  in  as 
space-fillers,  and  their  si/e  is  regulated  by  this  principle.  A  throb- 
bing life  and  energy  pervades  the  scene.  We  see  the  fierce  fight, 
the  breaking  of  bonds,  the  delight  of  freedom  achieved.  Here  the 
brute  triumphs  over  man.  The  other  cup  seems  to  give  the  sequel. 
A  solitary  man  is  in  possession  of  the  field.  The  beasts  have  sub- 
mitted to  the  long-haired  Achaean.  The  bull  at  the  left  has  been 
recalcitrant,  and  one  of  his  hind  legs  is  therefore  tied  with  a 
rope,  while  he  bellows  out  his  impotent  rage.  In  the  centre,  two 
bulls  are  putting  their  heads  together,  one  of  them   lowing,  as  if 

atented,  while  the  bull  on  the  extreme  right  appears  per- 
fectly tamed.  Man's  conquest  of  the  animal  is  complete.  Man  is 
supreme.     What  life  and  vigour  palpitates  in  these  figures  !     This 

it  borrowed  art.      It  is  taken  Straight  from  nature.      It  tells  in 

the  simplest  way  a  clear  story  which  cannot  fail  to  interest. 

In  the  following  year  the  lucky  finder  of  the  cups,  Tsountas, 
i       1  in  another  beehive  tomb  on  the  western  side  ofTaygetos  a 

lette1  which   show-,   more   clearly  than   smaller  objects 

the  usual  M\<  enaean  male  dn-^s,  a  simple  k>in-<  loth. 

.<•  bronze  -  from  the  pit  gi  ives  of  My<  enae  are 

beautifully  inlaid  with  figui  old.    The  1"   t  example  is  a  lion- 

'I  M    Dttt,   The  Mycenaeiin  Ay/,  PL    17. 


34  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

hunt1  in  which  every  shade  of  victory  and  defeat  is  depicted. 
There  are  also  fierce  scenes  of  warfare  in  intaglio  on  seal  rings. 

In  contrast  to  these  splendid  creations  of  the  goldsmith's  art 
are  the  works  of  the  sculptors  in  stone,  who  wrought  at  Mycenae. 
The  lionesses  over  the  great  gate,  to  be  sure,  even  without  their 
heads  deserve  admiration,  although  they  are  merely  a  heraldic 
decoration.  The  three  carved  slabs,  however,  erected  over  the  pit 
graves,  which  are  well  enough  preserved  for  us  to  form  a  judge- 
ment, seem  to  betray  an  absolute  lack  of  feeling  for  art.  They 
were  well  adapted  to  make  Schliemann's  foolish  critics  think  that 
he  had  broken  into  a  Gothic  cemetery  of  300  a  d.  But  the 
stately  lionesses, 2  despite  the  loss  of  their  heads,  perhaps  from 
that  very  loss,  inasmuch  as  imagination  here  holds  sway,  are  held 
to  be  fully  worthy  to  represent  the  art  of  the  mightiest  line  of 
kings  that  reigned  within  those  walls. 

In  the  museum  of  Candia  in  Crete  is  a  chariot 3  in  relief  which 
is  far  superior  to  the  rude  grave-stones  found  at  Mycenae.  The 
chariot  has  about  the  same  pattern,  showing  the  same  small  box 
and  the  same  four-spoked  wheel.  But  the  horses  and  the  warriors 
equipped  with  round  shields,  ready  to  mount  the  master's  chariot, 
are  vastly  superior  to  the  rude  designs  on  the  slabs  at  Mycenae, 
where  the  chariot  box  seems  perched  on  the  rim  of  the  wheel, 
and  the  single  horse  is  a  monstrosity.  Here  the  horses  and 
the  dog  under  them,  as  well  as  the  men,  are  cut  in  excellent 
relief  and  are  full  of  life.  Instead  of  a  single  horse  such  as 
appears  on  the  Mycenaean  slab  we  have  a  clear  indication  of  at 
least  two  horses.  The  art  of  Mycenae  probably  lagged  behind 
that  of  Crete  by  a  century  or  more,  and  the  difference  between 
them  is  shown  by  the  breath  of  life  in  the  Cretan  relief  and  the 
clumsy  silhouette  at  Mycenae. 

By  several  "  island  gems,"  found  in  Crete  and  elsewhere,  on 
which   lions   and    other   animals,    some    of  them   grotesque,  are 

1  Tsountas  and  Manatt,  Fig.  89. 

2  The  material  is  a  very  hard  limestone  (anhydrite). 

3  Von  Mach,  5. 


OLDEST   OR    MYCENAEAN    PERIOD 


a 


arranged  in  an  heraldic  attitude,  with  their  fore  paws  on  a  cube 
hollowed  out  at  the  side,  the  Mycenaean  group  is  taken  out  of  its 
former  isolation.1  Lions  in  Phrygia  grouped  in  the  same  way  are 
not,  as  was  once  supposed,-'  prototypes  of  the  Mycenaean  group, 
but  are  much  later. 

<  )n  a  wall  of  a  room  in  the  palace  at  Tiryns  was  found  a  paint- 
of  a  bull  galloping  to  the  Left  with  a  man  holding  on  to  his 
horns  and  swept  along,  with  one  foot  touching  lightly  the  bull's 
back  and  the  other  swung 
aloft.  The  execution  is 
poor,  the  result  of  several 
trials.  Three  attempts 
are  clearly  seen  in  the 
paining  of  the  front 
legs  and  the  tail.  The 
painter  was  a  bungler, 
but  he  doubtless  had  a 
good  prototype  in  mind. 
The  scene  is  no  longer 
a  puzzle.  Since  1S98 
excavations  in  Crete  have 
shown  that  this  bull-bait- 
ing scene  was  a  favourite 
subject  there,  not  only  in 

tcoes  but  in  sculpture. 
An  ivory  statuette  eleven 
and  one-half  inches  hi| 
from  Knossos,  doubtless 
formed  a  part  of  such  a 
group  (  Pieces 

:1  other  similar  figures  were  found  with  it.     The  attitude 
of  this  very  slender  figure  suggests  that  it  was  darting  through  the 

'/.//.v.  21     1     1   .  ,38,  pp.  159  161.      In  the  Mycenaean 

)»r<iu|i  the  '  ul":  is  doubled. 

-  J.H.:  '  ,il.  Niemann,  Tirytu,  PL  13 


Fig,  j 


Prom  .1  Bull-baiting  S<  ene. 

:.  1 .  '   n  !•-.) 


36  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

air.  We  seem  also  to  have  fragments  of  a  real  group  of  most 
ancient  toreadors  in  miniature.  The  bulls  were  doubtless  present, 
moving  on  solid  ground,  and  the  youths  were  probably  held  aloft 
by  wires.  It  is  certain  that  we  have  here  early  examples  of  that 
gold  and  ivory  sculpture  which  came  to  great  honour  by  the  hands 
of  Pheidias.  Remains  of  copper  wire  with  gold  foil  twisted  around 
it  still  adhere  to  the  best  preserved  small  head,  which  has  also  very 
expressive  features.  The  youth  was  blond,  like  Achilles.  Doubt- 
less no  one  would  assign  these  figures  to  a  later  period  than  1500 
B.C.     Perhaps  they  are  much  older. 

This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss  fully  the  whole  material  of  the 
Mycenaean  period.  We  are  concerned  chiefly  with  sculpture. 
Knossos  has  yielded  parts  of  two  large  reliefs  l  from  a  somewhat 
later  time,  the  chest  of  a  man  with  a  fleur-de-lis  collar  painted  on 
his  neck,  and  the  massive  arm  of  a  cup-bearer  such  as  appears  also 
on  the  frescoes  of  the  palace  of  Knossos.  These  two  pieces,  like 
the  statuette  above  mentioned,  make  us  realize  that  there  was 
sculpture  before  Agamemnon.  What  we  know  as  Greek  sculpture 
is  a  renaissance  after  a  dark  age.  Ages  passed  before  Greece 
produced  in  animal  sculpture  anything  equal  to  the  silver  bull's 
head  from  a  grave  at  Mycenae,  with  horns  of  gold  and  a  gold- 
plated  muzzle,  or  to  the  great  bull's  head  in  plaster  (gesso  duro) 
in  the  palace  at  Knossos. 

Before  closing  the  discussion  of  this  period  the  best  example 
of  plastic  art  found  in  Crete  may  be  here  cited,  although  it  is 
not  sculpture.  It  is,  however,  plastic  art.  A  vase  found  at  St. 
Trinity  near  Phaistos  has  on  its  shoulder  a  band  of  figures  in  relief 
forming  a  procession,  probably  a  harvest  festival  (Fig.  4).  So 
much  life  and  energy  appears  in  it  that  one  can  hardly  believe 
that  it  is  so  very  old  ;  but  the  facts  compel  us  to  call  it  as  old 
as  the  other  objects  already  mentioned. 

As  to  chronology,  what  was  learned  from   Mycenae  has  been 
supplemented   in   full   measure  in  Crete.      By  the  testimony  of 
vases,  whole  and  fragmentary,  it  has  become  certain  that  the  art 
1  Annual  of  the  British  School  at  Athens,  7  (1900-01),  17  and  89. 


OLDEST   OR    MYCENAEAN    PERIOD 


37 


and  civilization  brought  to  light  at  Mycenae  existed  in  Crete  with- 
out a  break  as  early  as  2000  B.C  In  fact  its  beginnings  were 
possibly  earlier.  It  was  probably  at  last  broken  up  by  invaders 
from  the  north,  with  little  culture,  called  Dorians.  These  prob- 
ably made  their  entrance  gradually  into  the  stately  seats  of  the 


PlG.  4.  -  A  Harvest  Home  Procession.     (Candia,  Crete.) 

older  race,  before  and  after  1000  B.C.  That  the  old  civilization 
did  not  at  once  perish  everywhere  is  shown  by  the  so-called 
na  Treasure  in  the  llriti-di  Museum,  dating  from  as  late  as 
800  B.c.'  There  was  doubtless  a  period  of  several  centuries  during 
which  the  older  race,  more  or  less  akin  to  the  invaders  and  living 
side  by  side  with  tlu-m,  so  influenced  them  that  they  in  time  were 
transformed  and  civilized  and  became  themselves  lovers  of  art. 
In  the  resultant,  passing  under  the  name  Hellenes,  no  one  can 

estimate  the  pen  enl  I  Old  and  new. 

1  J.J/.S.  13  (i.Sqjj,  195  (.;  Taonntaa  and  afanatt,   Tht  Myunatan 
389 1 


LOG  8 


CHAPTER   II. 

THE  ARCHAIC  PERIOD 

Section  A,  776-540  b.c.     Section  B,  540-480  B.C. 

The  first  part  of  the  archaic  period,  from  776  to  600  B.C.,  is,  for 
the  history  of  sculpture,  practically  a  blank.  That  there  was 
work  done  both  in  stone  and  in  bronze  is  proved  by  some  very 
old  statuettes  from  Olympia ;  but  how  much  was  done  in  wood  we 
shall  never  know.  This  was  an  age  of  colonization.  Greeks  oc- 
cupied the  coast  of  Asia  Minor.  Smyrna,  Ephesos,  Miletos  were 
founded.  To  the  west  the  shores  of  Sicily  and  Magna  Graecia 
were  dotted  with  cities,  of  which  Syracuse,  in  later  times,  became 
the  chief.  Trade  and  the  free  unfolding  of  civic  life  were  the 
great  objects  of  these  colonists.  Colonies  became  the  mothers  of 
other  colonies,  Miletos  being  credited  with  eighty.  Art  had  to 
wait.  But  its  hour  came.  The  period  from  600  to  480  B.C.  is 
bewilderingly  full  of  it.  It  is  difficult  to  classify  according  to 
schools  the  mass  of  sculpture  produced  during  that  epoch.  In 
the  first  half  it  is  impossible.  In  the  second  half  we  begin  to 
recognize  local  schools.  We  may  divide  the  archaic  period,  so 
far  as  sculpture  is  concerned,  into  two  sections  :  the  first,  from 
600  to  540  B.C.,  and  the  second,  from  540  to  480  B.C.,  and  in  the 
former  follow  for  convenience  a  geographical  order  from  east  to 
west.  There  are,  however,  a  few  types  of  sculpture  of  such  widely 
spread  prevalence  that  they  need  to  be  treated  as  groups,  irrespec- 
tive of  locality.  At  about  600  B.C.  Greek  sculptors  were  occupying 
themselves  over  a  wide  area  with  three  principal  types  :  — 

a.  Standing  male  type,  nude. 

b.  Standing  female  type,  draped. 

c.  Seated  male  and  female  type,  draped. 

38 


IHi:   ARCHAIC    PERIOD 


39 


<7.   The  first  type  has  a  very  large  representation  in  the  islands 

of  the  Aegean  and  in  Greece  proper.     It  is  the  so-called  "  Apollo 

type."     The  first  example  that  came  to 

light  was  the  Apollo  <.>{  Thera,  found  in 

now,  like  the  greater  part  of  the 

V   illos,  in  the  museum  at  Athens  ( 1  ig. 

In  it  the  characteristu  s  of  the  type 

are    most    sharply    expressed.      These 

are  :  — 

i.    Long  hair  fallingdown  over  the  back. 

2.  Shoulders 
broad  in  propor- 
tion to  the  hips. 

;     Armspr 
stiffly  against  the 
thighs. 

4.  Hands  closed 
not  in  the  form  of 
a  list,  hut  with  the 
thumb  facing  to 
the  front  touching 
the  tip  of  the  in- 
dex finger,  which 
]>    treated    as    if  it 

hail  no  joint.     The  whole  hand  is  thus  put 
(jut  of  joint. 

5.  Left  foot  advanced.  Hut  in  all  cases 
where  feel  are  preserved  both  soles  are 
pressed  flal  against  the  ground. 

Sini  e  we  find  these  five  1  hanu  teristics  in 

I        jUian     Statues,    there     serins    to    be    little 

doubt  that  the  type  wis  borrowed  m  some 

lion:    Kg)  pi.       <  M     \l\.  eii.ie  in    infliiciH  e 

there  is  not  .1  trace.     The  numerous  mem 
■  .1  this  <  lass  tall  mto  two  groups  accord 


I  i< ;.  ,.  —  Apollo  1  il   1 
(Athens,  National  Museum.) 


I 
tion.il  Museum.^ 


4Q 


GREEK    SCULPTURE 


ing  to  facial  expression.     Those  with  the  corners  of  the  mouth 
turned  up,  the  Apollos  of  Thera,  Melos  (Fig.  6),  and  Tenea  (Fig. 

7),  for  example,  have  been  felicitously  desig- 
nated as  of  the  "  grinning  type,"  while  those 
from  Orchomenos  and  the  precinct  of  Apollo 
on  Mt.  Ptoion,  whose  mouths  are  straight 
slits,  have  been  given  the  name  of  "  stolid 
type."  There 
are  minor  differ- 
ences in  each 
class.  The 
Apollo  of  Or- 
chomenos (Fig. 
8)  has  pecul- 
iarly square 
shoulders,  while 
most  of  the 
others  have 
them  sloping.1 

It  is  interest- 
ing to  notice 
the  gradual  im- 
provement of 
this  type.  The 
best  of  the  older 

Fro.  7.  —  Apollo  of  Tenea.  1  .1 

'   .  ,  V,,        ,   ,  ,      examples  is  the 

(Munich,  Glyptothek.)  x 

one  from  Tenea. 
But  after  that  came  an  improvement 
amounting  to  a  revolution.  Some 
statues  -  from  Aktion  show  the  outline 
of  the  thorax.  A  headless  statue  from 
the  Ptoion  (Fig.9)  has  the  arms  nearly 


FlG.  8.  — Apollo  of  Orchomenos. 
(Athens,  National  Museum.) 


1  There  is  one  case  of  an  "  Apollo  "  transferred  to  relief  on  a  column-drum 
of  the  old  Artemision  at  Ephesos.    J.  H.  S.  10  (1889),  PI.  3. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  76. 


THE    ARCHAIC    lTkluh 


4i 


free.    They  are  bent  at  the  elbow  and  held  only  at  the  wrists  by  sup- 

ts  two  inches  long,  extending  thence  to  the  thighs.     Here  is  all 

the  "  promise  and  p<  itency  "  vi  action.   'The  revolt  has  already  taken 

place,  but  from  shyness  it  has 

been  half  hidden.  Another 
Step  and  we  have  the  smaller 
A  illo  from  the  Ptoion  |  1 
10)  with  arms  separated  from 
the  body.  I  >wing  to  that  au- 
dacity they  were  lost,  all  ex- 
cept the  stumps.  This  final 
step  was  not  taken  until  about 
500  B.C.  The  whole  series 
stretches  over  the  entire  sixth 
century,  and  comes  down  into 
touch  with  the  Aegina  gable 
groups.  We  ought  not  to  be- 
lieve that  all  these  figures  rep- 
resent Apollo,  although  it  is 
quite  likely  that  some  do. 
The  last-mentioned  example, 
found  in  the  precinct  sacred 
to  Apollo,  and  dedicated  to 
him  by  an  inscription,  un- 
doubtedly doe 

This  type  received  a  chei  k 
in  the  fifth  century  at  the 
hands  of  the  Argive  school, 
which  threw  back  the  left  foot  and  put  the  weight  of  the  body 
on  the  right.  Thenceforth  the  terms  'firm-leg'  and  'free-leg' 
are  applil  able. 

/'.   Another  important  group,  but  with  fewer  examples,  i->  the 

ling  f<"  ure  draped.     The  oldest  ex  imple  is  tin-  Nikan- 

dre  nd  at  I  >eloa  in  ,  an  almost  .  but 

doubtless  ii  I  for  1  female  (Fig.  n).     In  fact  this  is  made 


Pl(  ..•).       1 1 11  -,.  1  in  mi  the  I  'i'  'i'  in . 
(Athens,  National  Museum.) 


42 


GREEK  SCULPTURE 


certain  by  a  boustrophedon  Naxian  inscription  of  about  600  B.C. 
on  the  left  side  of  the  skirt,  if  we  may  so  call  it,  telling  that  Nikan- 

dre  of  Naxos  dedicated  the 
statue  to  Artemis.  Probably 
the  goddess  rather  than  the 
donor  is  here  represented. 
This  figure,  slightly  over  life 
size,  is  appropriately  cata- 
logued in  the  Museum  at 
Athens  as  "No.  1."  There 
is  nothing  in  Greek  sculpture 
more  primitive.  An  ellipsoidal 
block  of  Naxian  marble,  origi- 
nally rectangular,  has  by  very 
little  carving  been  brought  to 
a  semblance  of  a  human  figure. 
Here,  if  anywhere,  we  catch 
a  carver  in  wood  turning  his 
attention  to  stone,  and  employ- 
ing instead  of  a  thick  wooden 
plank  a  stone  block  of  similar 
shape.1  At  the  bottom,  just 
above  the  projection  that  once  fitted  into  a  socket  on  a  base,  he  has 
cut  away  a  part  of  the  skirt  in  order  to  present  the  feet,  two  formless 
stubs.  The  skirt  encloses  the  legs  like  a  sheath,  narrowing  upwards 
slightly  until  it  reaches  the  waist,  which  is  made  by  cutting  out  a  little 
marble  between  the  body  and  the  arms.  From  the  waist  there  is  a 
broadening  out  again  until  at  the  breast  and  shoulders  the  original 
breadth  and  thickness  of  the  block  is  resumed.  Only  in  carving  the 
head  was  any  considerable  amount  of  marble  cut  away,  and  there 
only  at  the  top.  The  face  is  now  badly  battered  and  worn,  prob- 
ably because  it  had  long  been  walked  upon.  Only  the  carefully 
elaborated  hair  falling  down  the  back  has  been  preserved  perfectly. 

1  Unless,  indeed,  the  shape  of  the  figure  is  due  to  the  shape  of  the  stone  as 
it  came  from  the  quarry. 


FIG.  10.  —  Youth  from  the  Ptoion. 
(Athens,  National  Museum.) 


Till:    ARCHAIC    PERIOD 


43 


When  the  statue  was  first  set  up,  it  doubtless  made  a  better 
impression  than  now.     It  was   liberally  painted.     Besides  some 

neutral  tint  spread  over  the  whole  surface,  traces 
of  a  meander  pattern  on  the  girdle  are  still 
lc.  Two  or  three  similar  bands  running 
horizontally  around  the  skirt  were  once  traceable. 
Holes  bored  horizontally  through  the  clenched 
hands  from  front  to  rear  show  that  some  adorn- 
ment or  perhaps  attributes  were  held  in  them.1 
Strings  of  beads  have  been  suggested.  I-ess 
probable  seems  th<  stionofbow  and  arrow 

for  the  archer  goddess.  This  figure  did  not 
stand  alone  at  Delos.  Four  similar  statues  less 
well  preserved  are  catalogued  in  the  museum  at 
Mykonos,  one  with   a  better  preserved  head. 

From  the  Ptoion  comes  the  lower  left-hand 
part  of  a  figure*  with  an  archaic  inscription, 
ami  with  the  corners  not  rounded  off.  From 
the  same  place  comes  also  a  statuette1  in  the 
shape  of  a  thick  re<  tangular  block  with  its 
conui-  lly  shaved  down.      The  arms   are 

abnormally    long    and    not    detached    from    the 
j  ;    two   lock-,   fall   over  each    shoulder   to 
the  front.     The  breast  i-i  fuller  than  others  of  the 
period.      I  infortunately  broken  away. 

I  •  an  the  same  pla<  e  «  oraes  the  head  of  a  statue 
bn  f  at  the  neck  which    seems    to  show  the  carver    in  wood 

trying  his  hand  in  stone  (1   -    12).     From  Eleusis  comes  a  head- 
bout    a   foot    high,  like    the   former,  with    patches 
,,i  ■  int  still  on  it.     but  in  this  we  have  a  distinct  advance. 

Not  onlv  is  there  more  human  form,  but  more  attention  i^  given 


In ;.      11.  —  Statue 

dedicated    by     Ni- 

Icandre.     i  Athens, 
National  Mu- 

seum.) 


1    U 

i  I 

;  I  M        ■    ii  .  '. 

.  i  -  ■  I,  l  1.  -,  i  and  i  .'. 


44 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


to  the  garments  and  hair.     It  points  forward  to  the  "Maidens" 
of  Delos  and  of  the  Athenian  Akropolis  ;  but  it  is  not  one  of  that 

company.  It  stands  ready, 
however,  to  join  hands  with 
them  ;  and  from  this  point 
onward  there  are  not  lack- 
ing links  in  the  chain  that 
binds  the  formless  statue 
dedicated  by  Nikandre  to 
the  radiant  creatures  of 
Pheidias  and  Praxiteles. 

c.     Seated     female    and 
male  type  draped. 

The  Athenian  museum 
contains  two  very  old  ex- 
amples of  this  type.  The 
first,1  of  Doliana  marble,  is 
headless,  badly  worn  from 
having  long  been  used  as  a 
horse-block  at  Frankovrysi 
(Asea).  The  statue  is  "  all 
one "  with  its  chair,  so 
that  one  can  hardly  think 
of  it  as  having  the  power  of  rising.  The  arms  are,  as  it  were, 
glued  both  to  the  body  and  the  chair.  It  is  sexless,  unless  the 
inscription  "  Agemo  "  or  "  Ageso  "  makes  it  feminine.  The  sec- 
ond figure,2  in  poros,  was  found  on  the  road  from  Argos  to  Tripoli 
and  shows  an  advance  in  this  type.  Instead  of  having  the  arms 
glued  to  the  chair  and  the  body,  the  elbows  are  thrown  forward 
so  as  to  give  the  impression  that  it  is  ready  to  rise  from  the 
chair  and  act.  Strikingly  like  it  is  another  poros  figure3  from 
Eleutherna  in  Crete.     Both  are   extremely  Egyptian   in  appear- 

1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  144. 

2  B.  C.  II.  14  (1890),  PI.  ii. 

3  A'evue  Arch.  21  (1893),  PI.  3  and  4. 


Fig.  12. 


Head  from  the  Ptoion. 
National  Museum.) 


(Athens, 


THE    AROIAK:    I'Ekloh 


45 


ance.     Fragments  of  a   similar    figure   in    l'entelic   marble   were 
found  near  the  Hipylon  gate  at  Athens. 

Several  of  the  figures  which  once  lined  the  Sacred  Way  leading 
from  the  harbour,  Panormos,  to  the  Branchidae  temple  belong  in 
this  series  ( l-'ig.  13). 
<  >ne  of  the  oldest '  is 
inscribed  with  the  name 
Chares,  who  was  ruler 
of  a  neighbouring  city, 
Teichioussa.  Here  the 
man  is,  as  it  were,  grown 
to  the  (hair,  and  both 
together  form  a  three- 
quarter  section  of  a 
cube,  thus  [  L,2 

The  development  of 
this  type  also  may  be 
traced.         Two      female 

ues,  one  from  the 
Sacred  Way  and  the 
other  frr  m  Miletos  it- 
self,   take    us    along    to 

rly  the  same  stage 
as  the  seated  Athena 
from  the  Athenian  Akro- 
polis,  who,  however,  makes  a  step  farther  than  they,  in  that  she, 
with  her  right  foot  drawn  back,  seems  about  to  rise  and  act.  This 
line  if  followed   out   would    be   seen   to   end    in   the   seated    figures 

on  the  Parthenon  frieze  and  in  the  gables.     This  constitutes  one 

great   charm   in    the   study   of  archai<     Greek    sculpture      The 

11  the  old  typ'  on  step  by  step,  and  we  view  the 

1  Newton,  .  .-/  Halicarna    /<>,   PL  71;    Brunn-Bruckmann,  N  •. 

142  //  ;   Von  Ma<  b,  v 

•  \  nnaller  figure  of  the  Mine  type  wai  t"  be  ieen,  May,  1903,  lying  in 
•    t)i<-  bridle  [>at)i  leading  I r« -m  MiletOl  to  the  temple. 


FlG.  13.-   Seated  Statue  from  Branchidae. 
(British  Museum.) 


46  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

Apollo  of  Thera,  the  statue  dedicated  by  Nikandre,  and  Chares  as 
respected  ancestors  of  a  mighty  line. 

Before  540  b.c.  an  enormous  amount  of  sculpture  had  been  pro- 
duced, a  fair  proportion  of  which  has  been  preserved.  Had  we  as 
many  originals  of  the  period  of  bloom,  how  fortunate  we  should  be  ! 
Our  authorities  tell  of  Dipoinos  and  Skyllis,  sons  or  pupils  of  Dai- 
dalos,  and  of  Smilis  of  Aegina,  of  Klearchos  of  Rhegion,  of  Endoios 
of  Athens,  pupils  of  Daidalos.  While  we  have  to  treat  Daidalos  as 
mythical,  it  is  specifically  recorded  of  his  sons,  Dipoinos  and  Skyllis, 
that  they  had  works  scattered  all  over  the  Peloponnesos,  at  Sikyon, 
Argos,  Kleonai,  and  Tiryns,  and  even  in  Epirus  at  Ambrakia.  It 
is  also  reported  that  they  founded  a  school  in  Sparta  with  Tektaios 
and  Angelion  as  representatives.  We  hear  of  an  Argive  school 
represented  by  Eutelidas  and  Chrysothemis.  Smilis  also  appears 
to  have  had  a  real  career,  though  perhaps  not  in  Aegina.  In  the 
same  category  fall  Dontas  and  Dorykleidas,  as  well  as  Gitiadas,  at 
Sparta.  Even  more  real  seem  Telekles,  Theodoros,  and  Rhoi- 
kos  of  Samos  as  well  as  Glaukos  of  Chios.  But  it  is  only  when  we 
come  to  the  famous  sculptor-family  of  Chios,  of  which  Archermos 
is  the  most  important,  that  we  seem  to  touch  firm  ground  and  to 
find  a  work  of  art  that  we  can  ascribe  to  a  sculptor  of  this  time. 

It  seems  a  waste  of  words  to  discuss  sculptors  who  have  left  no 
works  ;  but  there  were  two  examples  of  the  art  of  this  period,  both 
vanished,  which  can  hardly  be  passed  over  in  any  history.  These 
are  the  Chest  of  Kypselos  and  the  Throne  of  Apollo,  falling  under 
the  head  of  decorative  art.  The  former  was  seen  by  Pausanias1  in 
the  opisthodomos  of  the  temple  of  Hera  at  Olympia.  It -need  not 
be  supposed  that  this  was  the  veritable  chest  hi  which  Kypselos, 
the  father  of  Periander,  was  concealed  to  save  his  life.  It  is  not 
unlikely  that  Periander  himself,  Corinth's  most  powerful  sovereign, 
had  this  token  set  up  as  an  offering  not  long  before  his  death,  in  585 
B.C.  It  was  no  ordinary  chest,  but  a  gift  fit  for  the  gods,  and  as 
such,  it  was  given  a  place  in  the  temple.  It  was  of  cedar,  and  the 
figures  on  it  were  carved  partly  out  of  the  wood,  partly  in  ivory  set 

1  Paus.  5.  17.  5  ff. 


Tin:    ARCHAIC    PERIOD  47 

into  the  wood,  and  partly  in  gold.  It  was  an  early  case  of  chrys- 
elephantine work.  The  arrangement  of  the  figures  was  like  that 
Been  on  the  old  Corinthian  vases  contemporary  with  it.  They  were 
deployed  in  a  series  of  hands.  The  very  scenes,  too,  are  some- 
times paralleled  on  the  vases.  Out  of  thirty-three  all  hut  two 
or  three  are  mythological.  Some  old  Argive  or  Corinthian  bronze 
reliefs1  may  aid  us  in  representing  to  ourselves  their  appearance. 
Inasmuch  as  the  chest  was  *et  up  against  a  wall  it  is  supposed 
that  the  abundant  decoration  was  confined  to  the  front  side  or  to 
that  and  the  two  ends 

The  other  work,  the  Throne  of  Apollo  at  Amyklai,  also  enjoyed 
great  renown  ;  and  Pausanias'  devotes  to  it  also  a  detailed  descrip- 
tion. Apollo  was  not  sitting  on  the  throne,  but  was  standing  on  it, 
and  probably  enclosed  by  it  on  three  sides.  A  coin  of  Sparta4 
represents  the  statue.  The  body  is  enclosed  in  a  sheath,  and 
for  this  reason  the  god  was  hardly  able  to  sit  down  on  his  throne. 
He  held  a  bow  in  his  left  hand  and  a  spear  in  his  right.  The  statue, 
forty-five  feet  high,  was  probably  much  older  than  the  throne,  which 

built  for  it  by  Bathykles  of  Magnesia  on  the  Maeander,  a  sculp- 
tor of  great  repute  at  that  time. 

As  long  as  Croesus  held  sway  on  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor  life 

tolerable  to  Creek  artists;  but  when  Cyrus  broke  the  Lydian 

vet,  about   546  i:.t  .,  the  storm  burst  upon  the  Asiatic  Creeks. 

:hen  no  more  call  for  artists.      Bathykles'  migration  to 

Sparta  probably  took  place  at  that  time,  although  it  is  possible 

that  the  art-loving  <  IroeSUS  may  have  sent   him  earlier  to  Sparta,  to 

te  with  which  he  was  on  friendly  terms.    The  restoration 
of  the   throne    built   by  him   is,  even   in   imagination,  much   more 

Hi^rvin.  ( Sardner,  63. 

-  I  be  beat  representation  "i  the  order  "f  n  enei  is  that  of  H.  Stuarl  Jonea, 
/.//.      14(1894  7.     Fuxtwangler,  Afeisferwerke,  723  f., 

put*  tli.-  work   s'-vi-ral   decades   later  snd   denies   all   connection  with   the 

Pi  ...    ;.   .  -    ■,  (f. 

110. 


48 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


difficult  than  the  restoration  of  the  Chest  of  Kypselos.1  A  thorough 
excavation  of  a  mound,  at  the  edge  of  which  a  part  of  a  half  ellip- 
tical base  was  uncovered,  about  1900,  has  afforded  valuable  infor- 
mation. The  throne  was  placed  on  the  grave  of  Hyakinthos, 
which  dates  back  to  remote  antiquity.  Mycenaean  objects  were 
found  all  about  the  mound.  It  is  likely  that  bronze  plates  pre- 
served the  wooden  structure  down  to  the  time  of  Pausanias. 

Assos.  —  It  is  a  relief  to  turn  to  works  which  have  actually  sur- 
vived.    At  Assos,  which  from  a  commanding  position  looks  south- 


Fig.  14. —  Reliefs  from  Assos.     (Louvre.) 

ward  towards  Lesbos,  considerable  sculptured  remains  of  an  early 
temple  were  discovered,  the  greater  part  of  which  was  brought  to 
the  Louvre  in  1838.  Some  important  additions  were  made  by  the 
American  excavations  conducted  by  J.  T.  Clarke  in  1881.2     Two 

1  It  has  been  attempted  by  Furtwangler,  Meisterwerke,  689  ff.,  Fig.  135, 
but  the  result  is  not  particularly  impressive  or  convincing.  Furtwangler's 
claim  that  Bathykles  belonged  to  the  Samian  school  may  be  allowed. 
This  work  was  a  greater  undertaking  than  the  Kypselos  chest. 

2  J.  T.  Clarke,  Report  on  the  Investigations  at  Assos,  i,  Boston,  1882;  ii, 
New  York,  1898. 


THE   ARCHAIC    PERIOD  49 

sphinxes  faring  each  other  were  probably  placed  over  the  main 
entrance  of  the  temple.  Several  metopes  may  be  passed  over  as 
of  minor  importance.  But  the  band  of  figures  (Fig.  14),  which 
singularly  enough  was  carved  on  the  architrave,  affords  great  in- 
terest. Among  the  remains  still  preserved  Herakles  is  conspicuous, 
combating  a  Centaur  and  a  Triton.  There  is  also  a  large  banquet 
scene.  These  figures  carved  on  blocks  of  very  dark  trachyte  must 
have  appeared  very  sombre.1 

The  sculpture  appears  very  archaic,  especially  the  Centaur  slab, 
where  the  long  slender  animal  body  is  a  mere  appendage  to  the 
human  body  which  seems  embarrassed  by  it.  In  the  Triton  scene 
and  in  the  banquet  scene  the  principle  of  isokephaly  is  emphasized. 
The  figures  standing  upright  are  as  pygmies  compared  to  the  reclin- 
ing feasters  and  the  struggling  Herakles.  This  does  not,  however, 
seem  out  of  place  in  the  case  of  Herakles,  since  it  lifts  him  above 
mere  human  beings.  But  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  banquet- 
ers are  more  than  ordinary  mortals.  Here,  certainly,  is  a  robust 
art,—  the  Herakles  reminding  us  of  the  same  intensity  of  struggle  in 
the  similar  group  from  the  oldest  Athena  temple  at  Athens.  The 
carving  of  reliefs  on  the  architrave  may  be  a  suggestion  of  the 
time  when  the  architrave  was  really  a  wooden  beam,  which  was 
then  cased  with  bronze  relief.  We  doubtless  have  here  Ionic 
art,  and  although  this  is  a  case  of  provincial  art  lagging  behind 
that  of  the  great  centres,  we  cannot  reasonably  put  it  later  than 

540  B.C. 

Miletos.  —  But  Miletos,  the  great  Ionian  metropolis,  has  some- 
what more  to  show  from  her  wreck.     Besides  the  survivors  of  the 
line  of  statues,  male   and   female,  along   the   Sacred  Way  to  the 
ichidae  temple  two  male    heads  somewhat  worn  were  found 
■  the  site  of  the  temple  itself,  one  of  which  is  DOW  in  the  llritish 
Museum,"  the  other   in   the    museum    at   Constantinople.3     Their 

ably  applied  on  a  thin  coat  "f  itua  0. 
-  1  ;„-■/,  Hi  Part  dam  PantiquUi,  viii.  281,  Fig.  113. 

•  PerroW  bipiez,  t.'iJ.,  Fig.  11.}.    This  bead  may  come  from  Branchidae, 
Sec  /.'.  C.H.I    1884),  331  ff. 


5<> 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


coiffure  differs  slightly,  that  of  the  Constantinople  head  being  more 
elaborate ;  but  the  features  are  strikingly  alike. 

Samothrake.  —  Of  the  islands  of  the  Aegean,  Samothrake  affords 
a  relief1  representing  Agamemnon  seated  on  a  stool  and  behind  him 
Talthybios  and  Epeios,  the  maker  of  the  wooden  horse,  each  identi- 
fied by  an  inscription  ;  Talthybios  also  by  his  herald's  staff.  To  the 
right,  considerably  mutilated,  is  a  dragon  with  wide-open  mouth. 
The  great  coil  is  a  "sort  of  horn  attached  to  the  back  of  his  head. 
The  lower  border  of  the  relief  is  a  guilloche  pattern,  while  the 
upper  border  appears  to  consist  of  alternate  forms  of  the  lotus  as 
seen  in  profile  and  from  above.2  The  relief  is  very  flat.  The  gar- 
ment of  Agamemnon  is  not  noted  on  his  formless  body ;  on  the 
others  it  is  indicated,  as  on  the  statue  of  Chares  (p.  45),  by  a  few 
incised  lines.  We  seem  to  have  a  scene  in  painting  transferred  to 
relief.  Samothrake  being  a  colony  of  Samos,  we  have  here  Ionic 
art.  The  plaque  appears  to  be  one  of  a  series  belonging,  perhaps, 
to  a  throne  or  to  a  statue  base. 

Naxos.  —  Naxian  sculptors  at  this  time  seem  to  have  devoted 
themselves  to  making  "  Apollo  "  statues,  mostly  colossi,  for  the 
neighbouring  Delos.  Of  two  such  colossal  statues3  in  Naxian  mar- 
ble, one  lies  broken  in  the  sanctuary,  and  of  the  other  we  have 
only  the  inscribed  base.  Two  similar  colossi 4  probably  destined 
for  Delos  are  in  Naxos  itself.  When  the  tyrant  Lygdamis  was 
overthrown,  the  artistic  activity  of  Naxos  seems  to  have  been 
checked. 

Chios.  —  A  statue  which  has  made  as  much  stir  as  any  work  of 
this  period,  though  found  in  Delos,  is  probably  a  specimen  of  Chian 
art.  Delos  was  a  common  centre  for  votive  offerings  of  all  the 
Greeks,  but  never  had  a  school.  Literary  tradition  assures  us  that 
Chios  had  besides  Glaukos,  the  worker  in  bronze,  a   family  of 

1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  231  a. 

2  Analogous  forms  appear  on  the  base  from  Lambrika  (Brunn-Bruckmann, 
No.  66  b) . 

3  B.  C.  H.  17  (1893),  PI.  5  ;   ibid.,  12  (1888),  PI.  13. 

4  Ross,  Reisen  auf  den  griechischen  Inseln,  i.  39  ff. 


Tin;   ARCHAIC    PKKIOH 


51 


Bculptors  of  uh<un  Archermos  was  the  most  celebrated,  although 
his  sons  Bupalos  and  Athenis  were  also  sculptors  of  note  in  540  B.C.1 
The  father  of  Archermos,  Nfikkiades,  was  also  a  sculptor.  It  is 
not  clear  that  Melas,  whom  Pliny 
calls  the  father  of  Nfikkiades,  was 
a  real  person.1 

When  in  1877,  at  the  beginning 
of  the  French  excavations  at  Delos, 
an  archaic  winged  figure  was  found, 
Homolle  called  it  a  winged  Artemis 
(Fig.  15).  Furtwangler,  however, 
recalling  a  statement  ;  that  Archer- 
mos was  the  first  to  give  Nike 
wings,  declared  it  to  be  Nike  and 
a  work  of  Archermos.'*  When 
shortly  afterwards  a  base  was  found 
near  by,  which  distinctly  mentioned 
Archermos  as  having  worked  with 
his  father  on  a  statue,  Furtwangler's 

ijecture  seemed  to  have  received 
sudden  corroboration,  and  the 
si  itue  was  generally  accepted  as 
the  winged  Nike  of  Archermos, 
and  wel<  omed  as  a  most  important 

ire    in    the    development    of 

sculpture,  and  a  masterpiece  of  the 

1     ; an  school.     She  is  represented 

ther  than  running  through 

e,  having  been  provided  with  three  pairs  of  wings:  one  large 

itt  u  hed  at  the  hack,  a  very  small  pair  at  the  shoulders,  and 

another  pair  at  the  ankles,     she  is  moving  rapidly  to  her  right,  the 

1  Pliny,  }'..  11,     Plinj  n  1  generations  extend  over  a  ipace  oi  2.1" 

.  uhi'  h  i-.  impossible. 

■  I:      ert,    /'■'/.  aV.vv.  /;/•»/,  1 1 7. 

a>  Birds,  573.         I    hc/i.   '/nt,  40  I  iSs-'  ,  ;.'i 


Fig.  15.  —  Winged  Nike.     (Athens, 
National  Museum.) 


5 2  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

right  arm  (restored)  extended  in  the  direction  of  her  flight,  the 
left  (also  restored)  pressed  against  her  left  hip.  She  is  completely 
clothed,  although  signs  of  clothing  from  the  waist  upward  are 
lacking,  except  that  the  pattern  of  the  painted  garment  has  left 
its  traces  in  the  better  preservation  of  the  surface.  The  skirt, 
which  is  wrought  out  in  marble,  extended  downward  between  the 
feet  and  formed  the  actual  connection  with  the  base.1  Down  to 
the  girdle,  which  bore  a  meander  pattern,  everything  is  calculated 
for  a  front  view  ;  but  with  no  mediation,  all  below  that  is  arranged 
for  a  side  view,  a  common  practice  in  archaic  art.  The  figure,  with 
all  its  paint  still  fresh  upon  it,  its  diadem  adorned  with  metallic 
rosettes,  its  necklace  and  ear-rings  shimmering,  and  set  up  on  the 
painted  Ionic  capital  of  a  short  column,  or  serving  as  an  akro- 
terion  of  some  building,  thus  appearing  to  fly  through  space,  must 
have  been  a  striking  one.  It  was  the  beginning  of  a  series  which 
had  for  its  culmination  the  Nike  of  Samothrake. 

If  the  connection  of  the  figure  with  the  base  were  certain,  it 
would  have  to  be  placed  near  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  century 
B.C.,  at  the  same  time  with  the  statue  dedicated  by  Nikandre 
which  at  once  conveys  the  impression  of  greater  antiquity.  In 
the  present  case,  however,  we  are  dealing  with  a  bold  innovation 
which  might  have  been  made  within  a  few  decades  of  Nikandre's 
statue  or  the  Apollo  of  Thera.  Some  authorities  see  in  its  features 
a  striking  resemblance  to  the  latter.  Half  a  century  might  be 
supposed  to  elapse  between  it  and  the  "Maidens"  of  the  Akropolis. 

The  connection  of  the  statue  with  the  base  has  been  disputed 
by  B.  Sauer,2  who  maintains  :  (a)  That  the  breadth  of  the  socket 
on  the  top  of  the  base  is  too  great  for  such  a  figure  as  the 
Nike.  The  garment  would  have  to  spread  out  abnormally  to 
fill  the  socket,  and  no  sculptor  would  have  chosen  for  a  thin 
figure    like  this  a  block    of  valuable  Parian  marble  so  thick  as 

1  This  is  made  certain  by  archaic  bronzes  representing  similar  archaic 
Nikes.  Cp.  De  Ridder,  Catalogue  des  bronzes  trouves  sur  VAcropole  d'Athenes, 
Nos.  799-814. 

a  Ath.  Mitt.  16  (1891),  182. 


THE    ARCHAIC    PKRIoh 


53 


to  require  the  cutting  away  of  two  thirds  of  it  as  waste.  (6)  That 
the  shape  of  the  socket  is  appropriate  only  to  a  squatting  animal, 
which  in  this  case  was  probably  a  sphinx. 

15ut  so  strong  has  become  the  conviction  that  we  have  here 
the  art  of  Chios,  that  even  if  the  connection  of  this  statue  with 
the  base  be  rejected,  many, 
perhaps  most,  authorities  still 
cleave  to  the  opinion  that 
this  is  An  hermos'  Nike.  We 
should  simply  stand  on  the 
same  ground  that  was  held 
before  the  base  was  dis- 
covered. 

Ephesos. —  The  reliefs 
from  the  drum  or  drums  of 
the  columns  of  the  old  Arte- 
mision  at  Kphesos  have  a 
peculiar  value  because  a  fairly 
definite  date  can  be  assigned 
to  them.  According  to  He- 
rodotos  (i.  92)  most  of  the 
columns  of  this  temple  were 
gifts  of  Croesus,  who  reigned 
from  5 Co  to  546  B.C.  The 
male,  of  the  Apollo  type 
(Fig.  l6),  whose  body  is 
fairly  well  preserved,  wears 
.i  (  hiton  with  the  same  shal- 
low folds  as  those  on  the 
Nike  of  An  hermos.  I  lis 
mouth  ih  so  large  that  the  "archaic  smile"  here  becomes  a 
monstrosity.  The  head  of  the  female,1  however,  which  is  fairly 
well  preserved,   is   a   tre  if  an  bait    Ionic   art,  and  shows 

what  an  advance  that  art  had  made  Bince  the  production  of  the 

1  PeiTOt  «  hipiez,  viii.   }22-  ]2  ;,  lij,'.  1 


Fig.  16.  —  Archaic  Drum  of  Column  al 
Ephesos.    (British  Museum.) 


54 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


Nike.     An  interval  of  some  forty  years  would  hardly  seem  too 

great. 

Samos.  —  A  figure  found  in  Samos  near  the  Heraion  (Fig.  17), 

and  from  a  dedicatory  inscription  justly  supposed  to  fall  near  the 

end  of  this  period,  carries  with  it  several 
related  figures  found  on  the  Athenian 
Akropolis  (Fig.  18).    It  may,  therefore, 


' 

■  1  Ml  ■ 

HI  1 1   H 

B 

"lie-                ■ 

J 

••  Ik 

fib;        I 

B 

MBS*      B 

8»             a 

1    '/jJjjJAfl 

Fig.  17.  —  Samian  Hera. 
(Louvre.) 


FIG.  18. — Samian  Maiden.     (Athens, 
Akropolis  Museum.) 


seem  proper  to  treat  this  statue  in  connection  with  that  group, 
even  if  most  of  its  members  fall  into  the  next  period  (p.  76). 

Boeotia.  —  Passing  to  Greece,  we  find  in  the  Athenian  mu- 
seum numerous  examples  from  Boeotia  of  the  Apollo  type,  both  in 
marble  and  in  bronze  statuettes,  mostly  from  the  Ptoion.  These 
are  examples  of  the  "stolid  type."     The  face  of  the  Apollo  of 


mi-;  AkriiAk'   pkriod 


55 


r 


v* 


Orchomenos  is  somewhat  battered  ;  a  perfectly  preserved  head 
of  a  similar  figure1  from  the  l'toion  lias  insipid  features.  More 
interesting  is  a  head  without  a  body,  also  from  the  l'toion  (Fig. 
i  2  .  which  seems  an  imitation  of  wood  carv- 
ing, the  nose  being  slashed  out  in  a  series 
of  planes  and  the  mouth  being  a  simple  slit. 
Anything  more  primitive  could  hardly  be 
found;  and  vet  it  may  be  no  older  than  the 
figures  just  described. 

A  remarkable  duplication  of  the  Apollo 
type  in  a  single  stone  comes  from  Tanagra 
(Fig.  19).  It  is  doubtless  funereal  in  char- 
acter. Two  persons,  presumably  brothers 
or  intimate  friends,  are  represented  in  an 
affectionate  attitude.  The  arm  of  each  figure, 
which  is  supposed  to  be  thrown  around  the 
neck  of  the  other,  really  comes  down  out  of 
the  coping  which  projects  from  the  back- 
ground over  the  loving  pair.  In  only  one 
respect  is  there  a  deviation  from  the  Apollo 
type  ;  the  right  leg  of  the  right-hand  figure  is 
thrust  forward  ;  thus  two  feet  at  the  centre 
project  There  is  some  attempt  at  making 
knees,  but  it  has  resulted  in  grotesque  look- 
ing pads  instead  Of  real  knee-pans.  That 
there  might  be  no  confusion  of  identity,  the 
stonecutter  —  we  can  hardly  call  him  an 
artist  —  has  conscientiously  carved  at  tin- 
right  and  left  of  the  figures  "  Kitylos" 
and  *  D  '     The  dedicator,  Amphalkes, 

1    in  an  inscription  al   the  bottom  that 
p<  ted  this  work  to  Kitylos  and  I  >ermys. 
The    mutilation   of  the    faces   may  be  attributed    to   the   early 
Christi 

•  r.r  .tin  Bruckmann,  N-"-  1  -'■•''■ ;   \  "ii  Mach,  1 


and     Kityloa     Relief. 
(Ailii-ns,        National 

Mil.) 


56  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

Attika.  — When  in  480-479  B.C.  the  Persians,  besides  destroying 
the  temples  on  the  Akropolis,  mutilated  the  numerous  statues,  the 
Greeks  regarded  them  as  of  no  value,  and  subsequently  used  them 
with  other  blocks  as  filling  for  converting  the  Akropolis,  which 
had  been  a  long  ridge,  into  a  plateau.  These,  exhumed  in  the 
excavations  of  1 886-1 890,  have  become  of  immeasurable  value 
in  the  history  of  art.  Several  gable  groups  in  poros  have  been 
put  together  out  of  many  fragments  with  striking  results.1 

The  oldest  of  these  groups  is  the  Hydra  gable,2  in  which  Herakles 
at  the  centre  appears  in  the  act  of  knocking  off  severally  the  nine 
heads  of  the  Lernaean  Hydra,  which  fills  the  entire  right  half  of 
the  gable,  its  coils  diminishing  in  size  down  to  the  corner. 
Herakles,  thrown  back  into  the  left  half  is  delivering  a  blow  as 
he  strides  to  the  right.  To  the  left  of  Herakles,  Iolaos,  facing  to 
the  left,  is  mounting  a  chariot,  one  foot  being  in  it  and  the  other 
on  the  ground.  His  head  is  turned  to  the  rear  as  on  a  swivel. 
In  front  of  the  horses  is  a  gigantic  crab,  the  helper  of  the  Hydra. 
The  gable,  made  of  six  pieces,  is  small,  only  about  eighteen  feet 
long  and  three  feet  high  at  the  centre.  The  material  in  which 
the  figures  are  cut  is  soft  poros  full  of  shells,  and  the  relief  is 
very  low,  only  about  an  inch  and  a  half  at  the  highest.  The 
grouping  shows  considerable  skill.  The  Hydra,  of  course,  natu- 
rally fills  its  half  of  the  gable.  On  the  left  the  descending  line  falls 
from  the  head  of  Iolaos  down  over  the  descending  necks  of  the 
horses,  which  are  made  to  bend  down  their  heads  and  sniff  at  the 
frightful,  monstrous  crab  in  the  corner.  The  figures  were  painted 
with  heavy  colours  —  black,  green  (probably  originally  blue),  and 
red  —  against  a  lighter  background.  The  Hydra  was  black  with 
green  (blue)  heads,  and  open,  red  mouths ;  the  crab  was  red.  It 
is  to  be  noted  that  there  are  only  two  human  figures  in  the  gable. 

1  This  was  a  long  process  ;  and  longer  still  has  been  the  attainment  of 
the  scientific  explanation  of  them,  which,  after  many  errors,  seems  to  have 
reached  almost  definitive  form  in  Wiegand's  Die  archaische  Poros- Architektur 
der  Akropolis  zu  Aiken. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  16;  Von  Mach,  40  a. 


THE   ARCHAIC    PERIOD  57 

A  gable  of  about  the  same  size  as  this,  but  in  very  high  relief, 
Contains  Herakles,  dark  red,  grappling  with  a  Triton.1  On  account 
of  the  difference  in  the  relief  it  can  hardly  be  assigned  to  the 
same  building. 

The  important  groups,  however,  are  those  now  shown  to  haw- 
belonged  to  the  gables  of  the  old  pred'eisistratean  Athena  temple. 
Here  Herakles  appears  wrestling  with  a  larger  Triton,  the  group  fill- 
ing the  left  half  of  the  gable.  The  struggle  culminates  at  the  centre, 
the  Triton's  tail  reaching,  with  its  sinuosities,  clear  into  the  corner. 
The  mighty  Herakles  is  at  the  utmost  tension.  As  if  there  were 
not  toil  and  trouble  enough  for  Herakles,  out  of  the  right  half  of 
the  gable  comes  flying  through  the  air  a   triple-bodied  Typhon 


Fig.  20.  —  Typhon  from  the  Athenian  Akropolis.    (Athens,  Akropolis  Museum.) 

(Fig.  20),  surrounded  with  serpents  and  holding  fire  in  his  hands. 
This  is  the  so-called  Bluebeard  group,  made  into  a  single  being 
by  the  two  wings  on  the  outside  shoulders.  Thus  the  west  gable 
filled.  The  east  gable  has  been  only  partially  reconstructed. 
A  head,  formerly  supposed  from  its  diadem  to  belong  to  Zeus  en- 
1  in  a  combat  with  Typhon,  in  the  west  -able,  was  found  to 
belong  to  a  brilliantly  painted  figure  long  known,  and  seated  on 
an  elaborate  throne  Zeus  was  now  taken  out  of  the  Typhon 
battle  and  pi  u  ed  m  the  e  isl  gable.     I  [e  was  seated  turned  to  the 

ri^'ht,  siik  e  011  his   l'-ft  side  J 1  i -,  beard  was  not  worked  out.      Cross 
ing  his  foot  was  another  foot  at  right  angles  to  his.     Another  figure, 

whi<  h  was  supposed  to  have  been  Athena,  wi>  pla<  ed  in  the  centre 
of  the  field.     1 lei  throne  tou<  hed  the  foot  of  Zeus.    A  third  figure. 

1  Bra nn  I \i m  km. urn,  No. 


58  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

all  traces  of  which  are  lost,  was  posited  to  make  a  triad.  To  the 
right  and  left  the  remaining  space  was  filled  by  two  serpents. 

The  contrast  between  such  a  gable  and  that  of  Aegina  is  at  least 
startling.  The  world  was  taken  by  surprise  to  find  such  products 
of  art  on  the  Athenian  Akropolis.  Here  was  no  Attic  grace, 
but  a  robust,  fleshy  life.  On  the  red  Typhon  three  heads  were 
seen  with  great  bulging  eyeballs  and  blue  beards.  In  the  rear,  the 
triple  bodies  ended  in  a  coil  like  entwined  serpents  with  colours  of 
red,  white,  and  blue.  The  Triton  had  equally  variegated  colours. 
Force  and  brilliancy  are  here  but  no  grace.  On  this  stem  was 
soon  to  be  grafted  Ionic  art  with  its  ever  graceful  forms.  But  the 
old  Attic  force,  after  appropriating  what  it  needed  in  the  way  of 
gracefulness,  went  on  its  way.1 

One  other  poros  group,2  not  belonging  to  a  gable  but  contem- 
porary with  the  groups,  is  worthy  of  praise.  It  represents  a  bull 
overcome  by  two  lions.  He  is  pressed  down  flat  to  the  earth, 
while  the  lions  tear  him  with  their  claws.  The  bull  is  considerably 
restored  ;  and  only  the  claws  and  parts  of  legs  of  the  lions  are 
preserved  ;  but  one  may  get  a  very  good  idea  of  the  whole.  It 
has  much  more  life  and  vigour  than  the  similar  group  on  the  Assos 
frieze.  The  bull  is  blue.  Over  his  side  flow  streaks  of  blood  from 
the  places  where  the  lions'  claws  tear  his  flesh. 

Besides  the  groups  already  mentioned  there  are  several  figures 
in  poros  which  have  not  yet  been  assigned  to  any  groups.  There 
are  two  heads  in  the  Akropolis  Museum  so  formless  that  they  seem 
the  first  essays  in  stone  by  one  long  used  to  carve  in  wood  with 

1  The  scholars  who  have  most  closely  and  successfully  studied  the  poros 
groups  on  the  Akropolis  are  Theodor  Wiegand  and  Hans  Schrader.  The 
description  given  above  is  derived  from  Wiegand's  book  mentioned  on  p.  56. 
Furtwangler,  Sitzungsberichte  d.  Munchener  Akad.,  1905,111,  433  ff.  (A.  J.  A. 
10  (1905),  189),  argued  that  the  so-called  Typhon  was  not  one  person  but 
three  (wind-spirits),  and  that  the  western  pediment  was  filled  by  Herakles 
and  Triton  on  one  side  and  a  great  serpent  on  the  other,  while  the  seated 
Zeus,  the  seated  Athena,  and  a  standing  Hermes  were  in  the  eastern 
pediment. 

2  llrunn-Bruckmann,  No.  456;   Von  Mach,  41. 


THE    ARCHAIC    l'KRiol) 


59 


tools  appropriate  to  wood.     These  look  more  antique  than  any- 
thing in  the  gable  groups. 

The  Calf-bearer,  or  Moschophoros,  made  of  Hymettos  marble, 
found  on  the  Akropolis  in  1864  (Fig.  21).  Twenty-three 
years  later,  in  the  great  excava- 
tions, a  base  was  found  to  which 
the-  figure  evidently  belonged.  ( )n 
this  was  .m  inscription  stating 
that  Kombos,  the  son  of  Pales, 
dedicated  the  statue.  The  in- 
scription confirmed  the  impression 
made  by  the  Style  of  the  figure, 
that  it  belonged  to  the  early  part 
of  the  sixth  century.  The  art 
of  Athens,  having  run  its  course 
through  the  softest  kinds  of  poros 
to  the  harder  kinds  in  the Typhon- 
Triton  groups,  was  now  ready  to 
attempt  the  more  difficult  task 
of  carving  marble.  In  the  Calf- 
bearer  we  see  this  attempt.  The 
sculptor  appears  still  to  have  used 
the  old  tools,  especially  the  gouge, 
traces  of  which  are  seen  above 
and  below  the  eyes  ;  and  between 
the  furrows  a  ridge  extends  out- 
ward from  the  outer  corners  of  the 
l  ■   ■    t  many  features  are 

explained  by  the  supposition  that  we   have   the  work  of  a  sculptor 
in   poros  who  trah  ferred    his   work    to    marble.       The    Calf-bearer 

Stands    like   the   old   Apollo   figures   with    the   left    foot    advanced. 

But  it  has  broken  with  the  Apollo  series  in  one  respect.     It  is 
clothed,  although  the  1  lothing  is  not  obtrusive.     It  was  once  doubt- 
helped  out  by  paint.     The  eye  sockets  still  contain  a  hard 

white  substance  into  whi<  h  pupil  and  ins  weie  probably  inserted. 


Fie.  21.-    Calf-bearer,     (Athens, 
Akropolis  Museum.) 


60  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

On  the  whole,  the  figure  is  much  more  stiff  and  expressionless  than 
the  Typhon.  Some  praise  the  calf  as  superior  in  execution  to  the 
man  ;  but  what  a  monstrosity  is  the  fore  leg  of  the  calf ! 

In  an  ancient  graveyard  not  far  from  Keratia  was  found  an  Apollo 
figure  which  in  every  way  shows  an  advance  upon  other  members 
of  the  series,  surpassing  even  the  Apollo  of  Tenea  in  hair,  muscles, 
and  features,  and  carrying  the  series  down  to  about  540  b.c.1 

Sparta.  — Turning  now  to  Sparta,  we  find  its  sculpture  represented 
by  several  grave  reliefs,  the  most  prominent  of  which,  now  in 
the  Berlin  Museum,  was  found  at  Chrysapha,  about  nine  miles 
from  the  city.  Two  figures2  are  seated  on  a  throne,  facing  to  the 
right.  The  male,  who  has  his  face  turned  to  the  spectator,  holds 
in  his  right  hand  a  cantharus.  The  female,  of  equal  size,  holds 
in  her  right  a  pomegranate  and  looks  straight  ahead.  In  front  of 
them  approach  two  diminutive  mortals  not  reaching  to  their  knees, 
male  and  female,  with  offerings  ;  the  male  bringing  a  cock  and  an 
egg,  and  the  female  a  pomegranate  and  a  flower.  There  can  be  nc 
doubt  that  the  large  figures  are  deities,  or  more  probably  heroized 
dead.  The  art  is  extremely  rude.  The  drapery  on  the  seated  male 
figure  is  of  the  same  kind  as  that  of  Chares  from  Branchidae 
(p.  45).  His  left  arm  is  a  monstrosity.  The  veil,  if  it  really  is  a 
veil,  which  is  being  lifted  by  the  female  is  very  clumsily  represented. 
Considerable  attention  is  given  to  the  details  of  the  throne  and  one 
of  the  sandals  of  the  male  figure.  A  serpent,  which  raises  its  head 
over  the  top  of  the  throne  from  behind  and  fills  with  the  coil 
of  its  tail  the  whole  space  under  it  may  have  some  reference 
to  the  underworld.  The  rough  stump  below  the  relief  shows  that 
the  block  was  embedded  in  the  soil.  The  ambitious  attempt  to 
represent  one  figure  en  face  and  the  other  in  profile,  and  to  give 
the   relief  a  considerable  depth,  is  worthy  of  note.3     The  con- 

1  Kabbadias,  Ephemeris  Archaiologikc,  1902,  PI.  3. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  227  a;   Von  Mach,  367  a. 

3  In  the  museum  at  Sparta  are  several  reliefs  of  the  same  kind;  see  Ath. 
Mitt.  2  (1877),  293-  A  part  of  a  similar  scene  was  found  at  Tegea  (Collignon, 
i.  235)  and  is  probably  a  product  of  Spartan  art. 


THK    ARCHAIC    1T.RII  ID 


61 


tours  of  the  arms  especially  have  been  thought  to  show  traces  of 
wood  carving. 

The  museum  at  Sparta  has  a  block1  of  local  greyish  blue  marble 
like  the  Chrysapha  stone,  with  the  field  tapering  upward,  sculp- 
tured on  both  faces.  On  one  face  is  a  love  scene  and  on  the 
other  a  murder  scene.  <  >n 
the  thick  edges  of  the  slab 
are  coiled  serpents.  The 
male  figures,  which  alone 
have  any  anatomy,  are  ex- 
tremely stumpy  and  remind 
one  of  the  Perseus  metope 
from  Selinus. 

Olympia.  —  Although 
much  of  the  art  of  Olympia 
before  540  B.C  has  been 
destroyed,  we  have  at  least 
two  pieces  of  some  impor- 
tance. One  is  the  colossal 
limestone  head  with  a  polos, 
posed  to  be  the  head  of 
Hera  (Fig.  22),  who  was 
probably  enthroned  in  the 
old  temple  by  the  side  of  an 

illy  an  hai<  Zeus.  The  other  is  the  fragment  of  the  gable 
of  the  Treasury  of  the  Megarians,  on  which  a  giant,  thrust  back- 
w  irds  to  the  right  by  Zeus,  is  almost  perfectly  preserved. 

We   Cannot   ascribe   these   works   to  any   particular   school;   but 

then-  seems  to  be  a  sort  of  kinship  shown  by  a  certain  brutal 
stockiness  between  the  Spartan  sculptures  and  those  at  Olympia. 
To  these  might  be  added  a  bronze  head  from  Kythera  and  a 
marble  head  from  Meligou/ 

1  P.runn-I'.ru'  Umann,  \<>.  22f>. 

•.tnfi.i     Ji,  Ergtbniste,  ili,  PI.  \  IreA.  Zeit.   \\     1     ■    .  20. 

4  Ath.  Mm.  -    1      •  .  1 1  2,  1  1.  -■,  Petrol  and  <  hipiez,  riii.  449,  Fig.  222. 


1  i' '..  22.  —  Archaic  Head  of  Hera  (Olympia). 


62 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


Corcyra.  —  We  may  with  some  probability  ascribe  to  the  art  of 
Corinth  the  limestone  lion '  found  on  the  tomb  of  Menekrates  and 
now  kept  in  the  governor's  palace  at  Corfu.  Its  elongated  form 
and  little  elaboration  fits  the  early  date  of  the  tomb. 

Sicily.  —  We  now  pass  to  the  extreme  west  of  Hellas.  Selinus, 
founded  about  625  B.C.,  was  doubtless  not  slow  in  rearing  temples 
to  the  gods,  as  soon  as  material  prosperity  was  achieved.  A  prob- 
able date  for  the  earliest   temples  on  its  akropolis    is    575   B.C. 

A  century  later,  three  great 
temples  were  built  on  a  pla- 
teau about  a  mile  to  the  east 
of  the  city.  The  earliest2 
of  the  akropolis  temples  has 
afforded  us  three  metopes 
put  together  of  many  pieces,3 
found  by  Angell  and  Harris, 
two  English  architects,  in 
1822.  Since  the  metopes 
diminished  in  breadth  from 
the  centre  of  the  gable 
toward  the  ends,  it  was  pos- 
sible to  assign  all  three  to 
adjacent  positions  under  the 
right  wing  of  the  gable.  The 
most  interesting  of  all  these 
is  the  middle  one,  which  rep- 
resents Perseus  killing  Medusa,  with  Athena  standing  by  (Fig.  23). 
This  is  one  of  the  most  important  documents  in  the  history  of 
sculpture.  The  forms  are  robust  and  the  faces  expressionless.  The 
action  is  supposed  to  be  fierce;  but  the  sculptor  has  not  been 

1  Collignon,  i.  Fig.  104. 

2  Usually  designated  as  C,  and  probably  a  temple  of  Apollo. 

3  Twenty-three,  forty-eight,  and  fifty-nine,  in  order,  as  described.  The 
temple  had  ten  metopes  all  on  the  east  end,  made  of  local  soft  stone  and 
covered  with  paint. 


Fig. 


23- 


-Archaic  Metope  from  Selinus. 
(Palermo  Museum.) 


THE    ARCHAIC    PERIOD  6;, 

able  to  represent  it  so.  He  was  hampered  by  the  usage  of  present- 
ing figures  in  full  idrc  Medusa  must  needs  be  so  presented  or 
she  would  not  be  horrible.  But  the  attitude  of  Perseus  sawing 
off  her  head  and  coolly  looking  to  the  front,  gives  grotesqueness  to 
the  scene.  The  sculptor  is  bound  by  tradition,  which  demanded 
that  the  head,  the  noble  part  of  the  person,  should  appear  in  a 
front  view,  while  the  feet  and  legs  appear  in  profile,  as  was  seen  in 
the  Nike  of  Delos  ;  but  he  was  daring  in  representing  two  suc- 
.e  events  as  going  on  at  the  same  time.  The  horse,  Pegasos, 
tlways  represented  as  springing  from  the  blood  of  the  slain 
Medusa,  but  here,  even  while  Perseus  is  severing  the  head  from 
the  trunk,  P  is  seen  below  held  by  the  Ciorgon  but  leaping 

away  to  the  right  The  forms  of  Medusa  and  Perseus,  especially 
the  thighs,  are  over  massive.  The  whole  right  leg  of  Medusa  is 
monstrous.  As  to  expression,  there  is  none,  unless  the  effect  pro- 
duced by  the  ugly  open  mouth  of  Medusa  with  its  protruding  tongue 
and  tusks  may  be  called  such.  All  the  metopes  of  the  series  were 
certainly  once  much  more  impressive  with  their  red,  blue,  and  other 
paints.  Athena's  robe  was  doubtless  brilliant.  Perseus  must  have 
had  a  chiton  and  perhaps  a  helmet.  The  hair  of  all  three  figures 
received  paint \  so  also  the  clothing.  If  the  paint  had  been  pre- 
d,  we  should  have  known  whether  the  coils  on  Perseus'  calves 
were  wings  of  sandals  or  simple  leather  boot-tops.  Athena's 
eyes  and  eyebrows  were  black.  Medusa's  eyes  red  ;  the  back- 
ground was  reddish  brown.  Thus  the  figures  stood  out  dark  on 
a  light  back-round.  The  features  of  this  metope  are  repeated 
in  the  one  next  to  the  right,1  which  represents  Herakles  striding 
to  the  right  with  two  mischievous  creatures,  called  Kerkopes, 
slung  ov<-r  his  shoulders,  probably  on  a  pole  represented  in  paint 

ionless  face   in   front  view,  tin-   fret    in   profile,  and  the 

massive  thighs  of  tin-  Perseus  metope  all  recur  here. 
The  third  metope,1  placed  toward  the  icntrc  from  the  Perseus 
w.i.   filled    with   a    four  lior  \t   chariot    <  0111111-    out    of  the 

1   I'.rimri-llni.  l.m.inn,   V,.  286  a  J     V"ii   \l  .<<  Ii,  47  b. 

km. inn,  No.  287  a  1   Von  Ma  h,  48a. 


64 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


background.  While  the  other  two  metopes  were  in  such  high 
relief  that  complete  heads  were  protruding  from  the  ground  of  the 
relief,  here  we  have  even  the  fore  parts  of  horses  standing  out 
of  the  relief.  In  spite  of  the  grotesqueness  which  pervades  the 
human  figures  we  must  admire  the  boldness  of  the  sculptor  who 


Fig.  24.  —  Europa  on  a  Bull,  from  Selinus.     (Palermo  Museum.) 

let  his  figures  come  out  from  the  background  so  freely  as  to  give 
a  challenge  to  timid  contemporaries  and  a  promise  of  attainments 
still  to  be  achieved.  This  is  essentially  sculpture  in  the  round. 
The  gift  of  expression,  however,  was  denied  the  sculptor ;  and 
while  attempting  to  depict  a  blood-curdling  scene,  he  fell  into 
the  grotesque.  The  absolutely  expressionless  mouths  contradict 
the  attitudes  of  the  figures. 


THE    ARCHAN     PERIOD  65 

Since  Selinus  was  a  Megarian  colony,  it  may  be  proper  to  com- 
pare the  massive  forms  of  these  metopes  with  those  of  the  (proba- 
bly contemporary)  giant  in  the  gable  of  the  Megarian  treasury  at 
Olympia   (p.  61),      Nothing  is  mote  natural   than   that   Megarian 

sculptors  should  have  been  1  hosen  for  such  works.  The  colossal 
Apollo  from  Megara  in  the  Athenian  Museum  is  a  proof  of  artistic 
activity  in  Megara  at  a  still  earlier  date.  It  must,  however,  be 
conceded  that  these  massive  forms  may  be  a  general  character- 
of  archaic  art.  Witness  the  lbrakles  in  the  poros  gables 
at  Athens. 

The  next  in  age  at  Selinus  are  three  metopes1  found  in  1S92, 
which  arc  of  quite  a  different  character.  So  different  are  they 
that  some  have  thought  them  to  be  of  Cretan  origin,  especially 
since  one  of  them  represents  Europa  riding  on  a  bull  (Fig.  24)  ; 
another,  in  fragments.  Herakles  and  the  ('retail  Bull  ;  and  a  third, 
a  Sphinx,-  which  gives  an  oriental  colouring.  The  most  important 
of  these  is  Europa,  riding  on  a  bull,  which  she  holds  by  the  right 
horn  with  her  left  hand,  and  gliding  over  the  sea,  which  is  repre- 
sented by  two  dolphins.  The  work  is  in  some  respects  an  advance 
on  that  of  the  previous  group.  The  form  of  Europa  is  much  more 
slender  than  any  of  the  figures  in  the  other  metopes.  Even  the 
bull,  with  the  ex<  eptioa  of  the  head,  is  gracefully  wrought.  The 
slashing  tail  and  the  vigorous  play  of  legs  are  especially  noteworthv. 
The  downward  curve  in  the  bull's  back,  more  befitting  a  horse  than 
a  bull,  is  perhaps  occasioned  by  the  need  of  getting  the  head  of 
Europa  down   into  the  field.     One  must  take  into  account  that 

the  bull  \$  really  Zeus.      Two  Other  sets  of  metopes  at  Selinus  belong 
to  the  next  period. 

Brunn-Brui  lemann,  No.  -  Ibid.,  No.  288  ,/. 


66  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

"  Etruscan  "  Chariot  and  Tripods  1 

Etruria  has  become  famous  for  treasures  in  archaic  bronze, 
discovered  in  1902  and  later.  One  such  treasure  was  long  ago 
scattered  among  various  museums,  Munich  having  secured  several 
fine  pieces.  The  place  where  all  these  objects  were  found  was 
probably  in  or  near  Perugia.  Not  many  generations  ago  it  was 
customary  to  classify  nearly  all  objects  of  art  found  in  Etruria 
as  "Etruscan."  To-day  most  persons  have  dropped  that  name, 
since  it  is  well  known  that  the  splendid  vases  found  in  Etruscan 
tombs  are  of  Greek  workmanship.  It  is  certain  that  we  can  call 
this  art  "  Ionic." 

The  Metropolitan  Museum  in  New  York  is  in  possession  of 
the  famous  "  biga,"  a  two-horse  chariot,2  from  Monteleone  in 
Etruria.  Though  the  woodwork  has  practically  vanished,  the 
fine  bronze  sheathing  has  been  carefully  pieced  together  and 
mounted  on  a  new  wooden  frame,  so  that  little  is  wanting. 
The  rounded  front,3  which  is  about  twice  as  high  as  the  sides,  pre- 
sents a  man  and  a  woman,  each  holding  a  side  of  a  notched  shield 
and  an  enormous  visored  helmet  with  a  high  crest  supported  by 
a  ram's  head.  Both  man  and  woman  are  exceedingly  archaic,  the 
man  being  shorn  of  his  mustache  in  accordance  with  the  custom 
of  the  sixth  century  B.C.  The  horror  vacni  is  exhibited  by  insert- 
ing two  large  hawks  flying  vertically  downward.  The  shield 
itself  presents  a  Gorgon's  head  at  the  top,  and  something  resem- 
bling a  lion's  head  at  the  bottom.  A  deer  turned  upside  down  fills 
the  space  at  the  bottom.  The  woman's  skirt  shows  elaborate  orna- 
mentation like  that  on  the  Francois  vase.  On  one  of  the  sides  is 
presented  a  duel  a  Voutrance  (Fig.  25).  Two  warriors  armed 
from  head  to  foot  are  fighting  over  a  fallen  man  whose  greaves 

1  Though  the  chariot  may  be  fifty  years  older  than  the  tripods  we  may 
group  them  together  since  they  come  from  the  same  place,  and  show  a 
kinship  in  art. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  586. 

3  Brunn-Bruckmann,  Nos.  586,  587;   A.J.  A.  12  (1908),  313,  Fig.  6. 


nil:     \RCHAIC     IM'.KIOI) 


67 


68  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

show  that  although  without  a  helmet,  he  had  been  in  the  fight. 
It  is  clear  that  his  eyelids  are  closed  in  death.  The  warrior  on  the 
right  is  probably  marked  as  the  victor.  His  shield  is  of  very  elabo- 
rate shape.  On  it  we  may  note  that  the  Gorgon's  head  is  placed 
at  the  bottom  instead  of  the  top.  On  the  front  of  the  chariot  the 
Gorgon's  head  was  naturally  placed  high  enough  to  inspire  terror. 
The  warrior  at  the  left,  bearing  a  round  shield,  is  a  doughty  cham- 
pion ;  but  he  is  probably  marked  for  death,  if  we  may  judge  from 
the  fact  that  his  brilliantly  decked  antagonist  seems  driving  his 
spear  downward  into  his  breast  just  inside  the  rim  of  his  shield, 
while  the  plain  hoplite's  spear  seems  to  have  its  point  bent  up- 
wards by  the  impact  upon  the  visor  of  his  antagonist's  helmet. 
The  eagle  also  seems  to  threaten  the  warrior  with  the  round  shield. 

On  the  other  side-piece  a  warrior  is  represented  in  a  chariot 
drawn  by  two  winged  steeds  (Fig.  26).  He  has  the  same  shaven 
mustache  as  the  warrior  on  the  front  of  the  biga.  Below  the 
horses  a  female  figure  in  a  long  robe,  rather  awkwardly  crowded 
into  the  corner  of  the  plaque,  raises  one  hand  as  if  to  ward  off 
the  hoofs  of  the  horses.  The  subject  is,  perhaps,  the  apotheosis 
of  a  warrior,  the  female  figure  representing  Ge,  Mother  Earth. 

Each  side-piece  has  attached  to  it  where  it  joins  on  to  the 
front,  a  most  archaic  figure  which,  though  diminutive,  finds  its 
counterpart  in  the  "  Apollo  "  of  Tenea  and  its  fellows.  This  is  per- 
haps the  surest  point  on  which  we  can  rest  our  conclusions  as'  to 
date  ;  and  600  B.C.  can  be  regarded  as  a  reasonable  date.  If  we 
did  not  know  that  both  side-pieces  belong  to  the  same  chariot,  we 
might  regard  the  side-piece  with  the  stiff  figures  and  the  schematic 
wings  of  Pegasos  as  older  than  the  other.  But  these  varieties  of 
style  must  be  accepted.  The  chariot  reliefs,  then,  bring  us  over 
the  waste  void  and  set  us  on  firm  ground  of  Hellenic  art  in  its 
earliest  stages. 

But  just  at  this  stage  the  claim  has  been  made  that  the  art  of 
the  biga  is  not  Greek  art  at  all  but  purely  Etruscan.1     We  must, 

1  G.  H.  Chase,  Three  Bronze  Tripods  in  the  Possession  of  James  Loeb,  Esq., 
A.J.A.  12  (.1908),  287-323,  PI.  8-18. 


THE   ARCHAIC    PERIOD 


69 


FlC.  27.  —  from  an  A  !  I     pod.     (In  thi  ion  ol 

(.tun     l 


7o  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

however,  declare  that  this  is  improbable.  It  was  the  Greek  whose 
art  was  found  in  Etruria ;  budding,  it  is  true,  and  with  strange 
eccentricities.  But  from  600  B.C.  to  550  b.c.  that  art  blossomed 
and  bloomed.  Fifty  years,  or  perhaps  less,  is  sufficient  for  the 
transformation  from  the  art  of  the  biga  to  that  of  the  tripods, 
part  of  one  of  which  is  represented  in  Fig.  27. 

These  magnificent  bronze  tripods  which  bore  bronze  bowls  are 
now  much  mutilated,  but  enough  is  preserved  to  show  what  an  art 
the  wandering  Greek  developed  wherever  he  went.  In  themselves 
they  are  a  handbook  of  mythology.  Heroes  and  heroines, 
"  Gorgons  and  Hydras  and  Chimeras  dire,"  "  warriors  that  with 
deeds  forlorn  went  down  scornful  before  many  spears,"  are  por- 
trayed in  true  heroic  spirit.  The  delicate  repousse"  can  never  be 
surpassed,  or  even  equalled.  The  figures  stand  out  clear  in  contour 
and  in  strenuous  action. 

These  stands  with  reliefs  are  of  precious  value  ;  but  the  bowls 
which  they  bore  are  practically  destroyed.  The  largest  is  4  ft. 
d\  in.,  another  4  ft.  \  in.  The  third  is  much  smaller, —  less  than 
3  ft.  not  reckoning  the  missing  bowl. 

There  seems  to  be  valid  reason  for  allowing  a  generation  or 
more  to  intervene  between  the  chariot  reliefs  and  the  tripod  reliefs. 
It  is  at  least  very  doubtful  whether  we  can  class  the  chariot  re- 
liefs as  Etruscan  with  any  better  right  than  that  by  which  our 
forefathers  classified  the  Greek  vases  found  in  Etruria  as  Etruscan. 
Besides  this,  Furtvvangler  refused  to  consider  the  art  of  the  tripods 
and  the  art  of  the  chariot  reliefs  in  any  other  relationship  than 
that  of  less  and  greater  development.  He  has  declared  with  the 
authority  of  a  master  that  the  chariot  reliefs  showed  a  well-meant 
honesty  which  in  due  time  came  to  honour  in  the  tripod  reliefs. 

It  seems  futile  to  regard  either  the  art  of  the  chariot  or  that  of 
the  tripods,  which  is  surely  akin  to  it,  as  of  Etruscan  origin.  The 
reliefs  on  the  chariot  are  doubtless  much  earlier.  They  show  an 
art  which  has  not  "  arrived,"  that  has  not  yet  felt  the  breath  of 
life.  But  let  half  a  century,  or  even  less,  pass  and  the  dry  bones 
have  become  quickened. 


THE    ARCHAIC    PERIOD  71 

Archaic  Period,  Section    B:  540-480  n.c. 

Lycia.  —  The  date  assumed  for  the  beginning  of  this  section, 
540  B.C,  is  not  entirely  arbitrary.  In  the  east  the  philhellenic 
Croesus  had  fallen,  and  art  was  practically  suppressed  in  its  cradle 
by  the  Persians.  \  struggle  for  existence  followed,  and  Ionia  suc- 
cumbed. Ionic  influence  in  art.  however,  had  extended  itself  to 
the  neighbouring  Lycia,  where  a  remarkable  tomb  was  discovered 
at  Xanthos  in  1838,  and  its  decorations  transferred  in  a  few  years 
to  the  British  Museum.  While  some  of  these  decorations  are  in 
the  purest  Ionic  style,  this  need  not  be  regarded  as  proving  the 
tonicizing  of  all  Lycia.  In  fact  it  has  been  held  that  the  tomb 
that  of  some  Persian  satrap  decorated  by  Ionian  sculptors. 
This  tomb,  long  called  the  Harpy  monument,  was  formed  of  a 
huge  monolith  twenty  feet  high.  Upon  this  was  constructed  a 
burial  chamber  formed  of  sculptured  slabs.  Over  this  was  placed 
a  broad  coping. 

On  the  wesi  side  to  the  left  of  the  centre  a  rectangular  opening 
was  cut,  not  large  enough  for  a  person  to  enter  except  by  crawling. 
This  side  seems  to  have  been  the  principal  facade.  Every  figure 
on  it,  with  the  possible  exception  of  the  cow  and  calf  over  the 
door.is  intensely  <  ireek,  resembling  the"  Maidens"  from  Delos  and 
the  Akropolis  at  Athens  (  Fig.  28  >.  Their  dress  is  very  rich,  and  is 
arranged  to  show  the  contour  of  the  body.  The  two  larger  figures 
Is  on  elaborate  chairs  seem  intended  for  divinities. 
Three  mortal  women  appear  to  be  bringing  offerings  of  fruit  and 
flowers  to  the  divinity  seated  at  the  right,  who  is  represented  as 
already  in  ]  .11  of  both.      On  the  opposite  (east)  side,1  more 

.   a  gigant:  ted   male  figure,  probably  the   heroized 

1  eiving  off-Tin--,  and   adoration  from  male  worshippers. 

Dire<  tly  before  him  is  a  diminutive  boy  offering  him  a  cock. 

'  I  1  the  n.rth  and  south  Bides  the  centre  of  each  field  is  filled  by 

le  one  on  the  north  side  re<  eh  mil;  a  helmet,  and  the 

>n  the  south  side  on, -iing  a  pomegranate,  a  pigeon,  and  Borne 

1    Bl   Hi!;  mi,   Mo.    I  1', 


72 


GREEK    SCULPTURE 


object  not  easily  recognizable.  At  the  ends  of  these  sides  appear 
strange  creatures  with  heads,  breasts,  and  arms  of  women  like 
those  on  the  west  front,  but  with  bodies  ending  in  an  egg-shaped 
protuberance  and  a  bird's  tail.  They  also  bear  a  pair  of  wings  and 
claws.  With  claws  and  arms  they  press  tightly  to  their  full  breasts 
diminutive  female  figures,  and  fly  outward  through  the  air  with 
them.  The  tomb  was  named  after  them  "  the  Harpy  Tomb" ;  but 
it  is  certain  from  the  tender  manner  in  which  they  handle  their 
charges  that  they  are   benevolent  beings.     Beyond   this  we  can 


Fig.  28.  —  Harpy  Monument,  West  Side.     (British  Museum.) 


hardly  hope  to  penetrate  the  symbolism  which  pervades  the  en- 
tire monument.  The  various  animals  —  cow,  dog,  pig,  and  cock 
—  may  have  a  significance  which  we  do  not  comprehend.  There 
is  something  suggestively  Asiatic  in  the  prominence  of  the  female 
element. 

In  the  art  there  is  a  great  contrast  between  the  figures  of  the 
main  front  (west)  and  the  other  sides.  The  former  has  Ionic 
grace  ;  in  the  latter  appear  heavy,  clumsy  forms,  reminding  us  of 
those  on  the  Spartan  tombstone  or  on  the  Selinus  metopes.  It 
may  be  that  some  gifted  Ionian  carved  the  main  facade  and 
left  the  rest  to  Lycians,  who  followed  him  afar  off. 

Thasos.  —  A  relief  found  on  the  island  of  Thasos  in  1864,  now 
in   the   Louvre,  represents,   on   one  long   slab  and   two  shorter 


THE   ARCHAIC    PERIOD  73 

ones,1  to  the  left  of  a  door  sculptured  in  relief,  Apollo  with  a  lyre, 
leading  a  band  of  Nymphs,  and  to  the  right,  Hermes  in  the  midst 
of  four  similar  figures  usually  interpreted  as  Graces.1  In  fact  in- 
scription on  the  Lintel  of  the  door  and  on  one  of  the  shorter  slabs 
indicate  that  both  Nymphs  and  Graces  were  here  worshipped.  We 
have  here  a  treasure  of  well-developed  and  graceful  Ionic  art  ;  for 
Thasos  was  Ionic.  Rich  robes  half  conceal  and  half  reveal  the 
full  female  forms.  Hermes  alone,  marked  by  his  wand  and  peUisos, 
is  both  scantily  draped  and  spare.  Ionic  art  has  here  travelled  far 
onward  from  the  stage  of  the  Samothrake  relief.  These  Nymphs 
and  Graces,  as  well  as  the  figures  on  the  facade  of  the  Harpy 
Tomb,  arc  twin  sifters  to  the  "  Maidens  "  of  1  )elos  ami  of  the  Athe- 
nian Akropolis.  Here  they  are  in  full  bloom  on  Ionic  shores  and 
where  Ionic  influence  reached.  Scattered  remnants  of  the  band 
arc  found  in  museums  with  no  record  of  their  provenience;  such 
are  the  figures  on  the  Villa  Albani  relief.'1  Then  we  have  the  stele 
from  Pharsalos,4  now  in  the  Louvre,  on  which  appear  two  women 
belonging  to  the  most  graceful  figures  created  by  Greek  sculptors. 
!  ept  for  the  eye  seen  in  full  while  the  face  is  in  profile,  one 
might  think  that  we  were  here  beyond  the  archaic  period.' 

Somewhat  less  archaic  is  the  tombstone  of  Philis8  found  at 
Thasos.  We  see  a  rich  lady  in  splendid  attire,  showing  a  full  form, 
taking  some  adornment  from  her  jewel-box.  She  has  the  eye  in 
archaic  fashion  in  contrast  to  Hegeso  (Fig.  95)  in  the  Dipylon 
cemetery,  who  shows  the  eye  in  profile 

Ionic  sculpture  has  now  become  predominant,  not  only  on  islands 

here  is  some  <l<>ul>t  as  to  the  arrangement  of  the  sialic.     It  was  |ir>>]>,.>r.i 
by  Mi'  haelia    ././../.  1889,  i^t  Seri<  ~,  5,    1 1 7    t"  assume  t«"  mor<  >h"it  slabs 
ami  arrange  them  all  in  the  firm  of  a  court  open  t"  the  front. 
runn-Bruckmann,  No.  61  j   Von  Mach,  54. 
Bruno  Bruckmann,  No.  228;   Von  Mach,  367  A 
*  I'.ruiin  I  Von  Ma  li,  158, 

■  Brnnn  maintained  the  existence  "i  a  Morth  Grecian  school,  to  which 
this  and  many  other  w>rks  were  t"  be  ascribed;    but  now  tiny  arc  more 

I  i  .  [onii  influen 

■  Brunn-Bru<  lemann,  No.  232a;   Von  Mai  h,  355. 


74  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

and  shores  where  Ionians  dwelt,  but  shaping  artistic  life  from  Lycia 
to  Thessaly.  Ionia,  weak  in  politics  and  war,  is  now  about  to  assert 
a  predominance  in  art  over  Athens,  to  envelope  it. 

Athens.  —  We  have  seen  that  Athens  had  an  art  sufficiently  ro- 
bust, which  after  long  practice  in  poros  stone  made  essays  in  marble. 
One  would  hardly  have  expected  an  advent  of  Attic  grace  from 
these  beginnings.  We  shall  never  know  what  might  have  been  the 
result  if  Athens  had  taken  its  own  way  of  development  for  another 
half  century.  The  fall  of  Croesus,  however,  and  the  ruin  of  Ionia 
set  free  and  sent  over  to  the  Greek  mainland  a  host  of  Ionic 
artists.  Some  of  their  names  we  know  from  inscriptions.  Attic 
art  was  submerged  as  thoroughly  as  the  Roman  state  was  sub- 
merged when  "the  Orontes  flowed  into  the  Tiber";  but  it  re- 
appeared, and,  endued  with  native  strength  and  acquired  sweet- 
ness, ran  its  course  before  an  admiring  world. 

The  excavations  on  the  Akropolis,  1 886-1 889,  revealed  the  sub- 
mergence and  the  emergence.  On  a  single  day  in  February, 
1886,  fourteen  marble  statues,  most  of  them  with  heads,  were 
taken  out  of  the  ground  with  pomp  and  ceremony  in  the  presence 
of  the  king  of  Greece.  Their  battered  condition  showed  clearly 
that  Persians  had  wreaked  their  vengeance  on  them.  But  even  in 
this  condition  they  and  many  similar  figures,  found  before  and  after, 
afford  an  adequate  picture  of  the  art  of  Athens  during  the  whole 
period  under  consideration.1  While  we  have  not  all  the  statues 
that  once  decked  the  temple  precinct  of  Athena,  we  have  so  much 
that  we  would  willingly  exchange  some  of  it  for  material  to  fill 
other  great  gaps  in  the  history  of  art.  But  it  is  an  immense  ad- 
vantage that,  making  all  due  allowance  for  peculiarities  of  individ- 
ual sculptors,  we  can  trace  approximately  the  course  of  the 
development  of  sculpture  in  Athens  from  540  to  480  b.c.  And 
now  Athens  becomes  by  far  the  most  important  field  in  the  study 
of  the  period.  In  the  old  centres  of  productivity  like  Samos  and 
Miletos  nothing  was  produced,  or  if  anything  was  produced,  it  was 

1  See  Lechat,  An  Musee  de  PAcropole  cPAthenes  ;  Schrader,  Die  ar- 
chaische  Marmor-Skulpturen  im  Akropolis- Museum  zu  Athen,  1909. 


1111.     ARCHAIC    PERIOD  75 

probably  destroyed  almost  n  as  made.     Athens,  on  the  con- 

trary, enjoyed  during  the  greater  part  of  this  period,  the  stable, 


.Mire.  I- 1  ..  30.      M  rate  Vn  haic  Figure. 

(Athens,  Aki  im.)  (Athens,  Akropoli    Museum.) 

if  not  al  overnment  of  the  enlightened,  art-loving 

t\  t  nit,  Peis  and  that  <»f  his  sons. 

It  has  been  surmised  that  some  ol  the  statues  of  the  Akropo* 

hs    were    made    l>v    Ionic    artist-,   who    are    known    to    fame, 

ral   winged    Nikes,  similar  to  the  one  found  in  Delos,  only 


76 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


much  more  developed,  were  found  on  the  Akropolis ;  and  an 
inscription  on  the  shaft  of  a  column  which  may  well  have  sup- 
ported one  of  them  contains  the 
name  Archermos.  This  suggests 
linking  the  famous  Chian  sculptor 
with  the  art  of  Athens.  Nothing 
could  be  more  natural.  More- 
over, near  the  Heraion  in  Samos 
was  found  a  peculiar  archaic 
statue1  dedicated  to  Hera  by  one 
Cheramyes.  The  style  of  the 
statue  is  exceedingly  primitive. 
The  part  below  the  waist  resem- 
bles a  cylinder  ;  and  the  presence 
of  a  garment  or  garments  upon  it 
is  indicated  by  long,  fine,  perpen- 
dicular lines.  The  himation,  if 
we  may  so  call  it,  falls  only  on 
the  right  side  down  below  the 
hips.  Some  have  seen  in  this 
style  an  imitation  of  metal  work, 
the  surface  of  which  might  well 
have  been  made  by  tracing  long 
lines  upon  it  with  a  burin.  One 
of  the  Akropolis  figures,  of  which 
only  the  upper  half  is  preserved, 
shows  exactly  the  same  tech- 
nique.2 A  third  similar  figure, 
also  found  on  the  Akropolis,  sup- 
plements the  others  in  some  de- 
tails.3 They  form  a  unique  group,  appearing,  except  for  variation 
in  size,  to  be  replicas  of  one  and  the  same  statue.     The  second 

1  Fig-  17  (p-  54)- 

2  Lechat,  An  Musee  de  VAcropole  d'Athenes,  395,  Fig.  44. 

3  Lechat,  ibid.,  399,  Fig.  45. 


Fig.  31. —  Pathetic  Archaic  Figure. 
(Athens,  Akropolis  Museum.) 


THE    ARCH  VIC    PERIOD 


77 


figure  alone  has  a  head  ;  and  this  is  so  rude  and  expressionless, 
with  a  nose  like  a  half  pyramid,  a  mouth  composed  of  a  simple 
slit,  and  eyes  merely  marked  out  on  the  surface,  that  it  conveys 
an  idea  of  greater  antiquity  than  the  smiling  sisters  by  which  it  is 
surrounded  in  the  Akropolis  Museum.  Since  one  of  the  figures 
found  in  Samos,  it  was  thought  reasonable  to  regard  them  all 
.1-  examples  of  Samian 
art.  When  an  inscrip- 
tion was  found  on  the 
Akropolis,  giving  the 
name  Theodoros  ill 
Ionic  letters,  the  case 
of  Samian  influence  in 
Athens  seemed  proved. 
It  was  a  great  gain 
to  have  established  a 
probable  connection 
between  some  of  the 
Akropolis  figures  and 
the  two  schools  of 
S  imos  and  Chios.1 

There  is  such  a  va- 
riety in  the  twenty  or 
thirty  female  statues 
from  the  Akropolis, 
that  the  classification 
of  them  according  to 
time  has  been  found  difficult  Figure  29,  for  instance,  has  in  the 
form  of  the  body  a  strong  resemblance  to  the  statue  dedicated  by 
Nikandre,  but  the  face  has  lively  expression.  Typical  of  the  great- 
if  elaboration  is  Fig.  30,  on  which  the  hair,  both  the 


^Rr                                       ^5 

'  1                                         ■ 

.        1 

^^m 

mLs          *          m^^I 

T     A 

FIG.  32.  —  Finest  rypeol  Archaic  Figure. 
(Athens,  Akropolis  Museum.) 


1  B.  Saner,  Ath.  Mitt,  17  (1892),  37,  \\^  by  a  careful  itudy  of  marble* 
shown  that  the  statu'  menli  i  .  with  many  others,  ol  \ 

marlil-        II-    bringi  into  prominence  ■>  Naxian    ichool,  ihowing  activity  in 

tia  and  the  westi  Uuumania. 


78 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


locks  on  the  forehead  and  the  ringlets  falling  over  the  breast,  and 
the  garments,  both  chiton  and  himation,  surpass  all  the  others  in 
elegance  of  detail.  It  seems  to  represent  the  flood  tide  of  Ionic 
influence.  Another  figure  (Fig.  31)  has  the  hair  undercut  in  such 
a  way  as  to  shade  the  face  and  give  her  a  pensive  and  almost  pa- 
thetic look,  which  was  perhaps  not  intended.  Perhaps  the  most 
typical  and  satisfactory  representative  of  the  whole  group  is  one  of 
which  the  head  only  is  preserved  (Fig.  32).  The  face  shows  the 
full  forms  of  a  matron  rather  than  those  of  a  maiden.     The  archaic 

smile  is  toned  down  ;  the  hair, 
while  very  elaborate,  has  not  the 
excessive  elaboration  of  Fig.  30. 
While  in  none  of  the  series  is 
there  any  proper  eye  socket,  in 
this  figure  the  eyeballs  even  pro- 
trude in  a  marked  manner. 

At  some  time  shortly  before 
480  B.C.  a  revolt  against  Ionism 
took  place.  Whether  it  was  a 
revolt  of  the  native  Athenian 
strength  or  an  influx  of  sober 
Dorian  influence  is  not  certain. 
But  the  woman  pictured  in  Fig. 
^^  is  in  some  important  points 
diametrically  opposed  to  her  sis- 
ters, and  notably  to  the  one  just 
mentioned  as  typical  of  the  group. 
The  eyes  are  not  yet,  it  is  true, 
set  back  into  the  skull  as  nature  demands,  but  the  thick  eye- 
lids afford  a  deep  setting,  contrasted  with  the  protruding  eyeballs 
hardly  held  in  by  the  thin  eyelids  of  the  typical  representative. 
The  corners  of  the  mouth  not  only  do  not  turn  up,  but  they  posi- 
tively turn  down,  with  a  pouting  expression,  which  has  given  her  the 
popular  name  of  la  petite  boudeuse.  Moreover,  we  see  here  for 
the  first  time  the  nose  continuing  downward  the  line  of  the  fore- 


FlG.  33.  — A  Revolt  toward  Simplicity. 
(Athens,  Akropolis  Museum.) 


TH1     AR<   II  \If    I'KKIol) 


79 


head,  giving  the  so-called  "Greek  profile."  The  line  of  the 
mouth  i>  a  Cupid's  bow.  On  the  whole,  the  result  is  an  aiisto- 
cratic.  disdainful,  but  not  unpleasing  face. 

mped  with  her  is  a  head  of  a  boy  of  the  same  age 
.  34),  sa)  sixteen  \ears  old,  who  has  the  same  eyes,  nose, 
and  mouth,  so  that  his  popular 
name  is  If  frere  de  hi  petite 
boudeuse.  These  figures  certainly 
mark  a  rea<  lion  against  the  per- 
petual smile,  that  mark  of  archaic 
(ireek.  or   mor<  tally    Ionic, 

ilpture. 

We  know  that  tiie  reaction 
came  shortly  before  the  Persian 
War.  The  two  figures  could  not 
have  been  long  exposed  when  the 
( \\x  lie.     The  yellow   hair 

of  the  ':  1  almost  freshly 

painted  when  it  was  taken  out  of  ^T  ,  ,  Ve„ow 

the  ground,  and  yellow  is  a   Color     Hair.     (Athens,  Akropolis  Museum.) 
that  would    soon    fade  when   ex- 

;  to  continuous  moisture.  The  pupils  and  red  lips  of  the 
maiden  bear  their  paint  well  preserved. 

re,  probably  at  about  the  middle  of  the  situs,  belongs 
one  of  the  >f  the  "Maidens"   (Fig.  35),  which,  after  con- 

siderabl  ction,  was  probablj   correctly   placed  upon  a  high 

stal  bearing  the  nunc  of  an  Athenian  sculptor,  Antenor, 
who  also  made  the  group  of  the  Tyrannicides,  Harmodios  and 
At  »n,  at  about  510 

I        :       •  md  <lis(  uss    every   member    of   this    1.:'  up, 

mt'i  ■  would  be,  is  asi<l<-  from  the  purpose  of  a  manual  ; 

neither  can  we  here  go  into  the  details  "i    dress,  coiffure,  etc.1 

mmarily  it  ma)  be  stated  that  pra<  tu  ally  all  are  of  Parian  mar- 

bi<  al  blo<  ks  ot  1  bout  the  size  <■!'  the  body,  which 

■     I  11 ri. 


8o 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


received  their  shape  in  Athens.  The  projecting  forearm,  usually 
the  right,  was  made  of  a  separate  piece,  inserted  in  a  socket  and 
held  by  a  marble  peg  smeared  with  fine  lime.     Heads  were  often 

added  in  the  same  way.  By  these 
means  the  difficulty  and  expense  in- 
volved in  hewing  the  statue  —  arms, 
head,  and  all  —  out  of  a  single  large 
block  was  avoided.  The  similar 
"  Maidens  "  in  Delos,  the  nearest  kin 
to  the  Akropolis  figures,  do  not  show 
such  piecing.  Parian  marble  was  more 
valuable  in  Athens  than  it  was  in  Delos 
near  the  quarries. 

The  statues  were  painted,  but  not 
covered  with  paint,  as  was  the  case  with 
the  poros  sculptures.  Regard  was 
shown  to  the  value  and  beauty  of 
Parian  marble.  Only  the  borders  of 
garments,  shoes,  diadems,  earrings, 
eyes,  and  mouth,  received  paint,  which 
was  not  intended  to  cover,  but  to  adorn. 
The  dress  of  these  figures  has  evoked 
voluminous  discussion.  Much  of  this  is 
superfluous  because  it  starts  with  the 
assumption  that  all  the  garments  may 
be  thoroughly  explained  and  reduced 
to  a  single  norm,  whereas  in  fact  there 
is  endless  variety.  Sometimes  we 
have  only  a  single  garment,  sometimes 
two,  sometimes  three.  It  is  at  least  probable  that  one  stunted 
figure  has  but  one  garment,  a  sleeved  chiton,  but  the  upper  part  is 
made  to  appear  crimpled,  while  the  lower  part  is  smooth,  except 
as  it  is  wrinkled  by  being  drawn  up  in  the  left  hand.  In  the 
other  figures  not  only  does  the  upper  part  of  the  chiton,  which  is 
smooth  below,  show  on  the  left  breast  and  shoulder  this  crimpled 


Fig.  35. —  Figure  sculptured 
by  Anterior.  (Athens,  Akro- 
polis Museum.) 


THE    ARCHAIC    PERIOD  81 

appearance,  but  the  peplos  also,  all  over  the  right  shoulder,  shows 
a  similar  surface.  These  figures,  which  on  first  sight  seem  so 
much  alike  that  they  were  dubbed  in  the  lump  as  Tauten  by  Her- 
man archaeologists,  are  seen  on  closer  view  to  show  endless  variety 
in  dress  and  coiffure. 

They  were  usually  raised  five  or  six  feet  above  the  rock  of  the 
Akropolis  by  a  marble  shaft  with  a  base  and  capital.  The  heads 
of  many,  if  not  all,  were  protected  by  a  wooden  disk,  probably 
gilded,  and  certainly  lifted  a  little  above  the  head  by  bronze 
roils,  several  of  which  remain  inserted  in  the  cranium.  This 
protection  was  ne<  ess arv  against  the  birds,1  which  were  attracted 
by  the  sacrifices  at  the  great  altar  of  Athena.  The  delicately- 
painted  figures  must  not  be  defiled. 

The  Akropolis  in  the  time  of  Peisistratos  must  have  presented  a 
brilliant  spectacle.  Around  the  temple  of  Athena,  itself  resplen- 
dent with  brilliant  paint,  stood  these  figures  along  the  slopes  and 
on  the  ridge  of  the  Akropolis  rock. 

The  question  used  to  be  much  debated  whom  these  figures 
represented.  They  were  long  stoutly  claimed  to  be  images  of 
the  goddess  herself.^  But  it  is  beyond  question  that  not  one  of 
them  bears  any  mark  of  divinity.  A  claim  was  made  that 
they  were  priestesses  of  Athena.-'  But  on  that  supposition 
there  must  have  been  terrible  mortality  among  these  priestesses, 
because  there  was  only  one  priestess  at  a  time,  and  she  held  offii  e 
for  life  ;  so  that  the  whole  period  of  sixty  years  would  not  call 
for  more  than  a  tenth  part  of  the  figures  that  we  have  ;  and  it  is 
by  no  means  probable  that  we  have  them  all.  An  inscription 
found  on  the  Akropolis,  whii  h  speaks  of  a  fisherman  dedicating  a 
maiden  to  Poseidon,  lead-  us  to  believe  that  most,  it  not  all,  of 

the  statues  under  consideration  are  of  mortal   mauls  and   matrons, 

dedicated  to  Athena,  and  not  images  of  the  goddess  herself,  it  is 
perhaps  a  special  case  thai  Poseidon  should  receive  a  maiden  as 

1  Arbtoph  ,  Birds,  \  \  \  \  fT.  ;   Eurip.,  Ton,  157  ff. 

'One  I  orach  aj  she  bean  In  one  band  a 

th  and  in  the  •■ih'-r  ;i  vase  of  ointment. 


82 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


an  offering  to  him  on  the  Akropolis ;  but  that  the  maiden  goddess 
herself  should  receive  such  offerings  was  most  natural. 

Besides  the  female  statues  there  were  a  few  males,  mostly 
youths  (epheboi).  The  youth  with  the  yellow  hair  was  probably 
not  surrounded  by  so  many  companions  as  was  his  twin   sister, 

above  referred  to.  But  the  male  line  was 
fairly  represented.  Besides  the  yellow- 
haired  Ephebos  one  such  representative 
(Fig.  36)  came  to  his  rights  in  securing 
his  proper  head,  by  the  consent  of  a 
council  of  famous  archaeologists,  after 
carrying  a  wrong  one  for  eight  years.  A 
second  has  been  given  a  head  which  had 
for  some  time  been  lying  about  the  Akrop- 
olis Museum.  The  effect  in  the  latter 
case  is  not  so  satisfactory  as  in  the  former, 
in  which  we  seem  to  see  a  striking  resem- 
blance to  Harmodios  (p.  119),  so  far  as  a 
youth  of  sixteen  might  resemble  a  man  of 
twenty.  The  heavy  chin  of  Harmodios  is 
reproduced  in  due  proportions.  The  head 
of  an  athlete  in  Copenhagen1  belonging  to 
this  period,  doubtless  came  from  Athens, 
as  well  as  the  notable  head  from  the  Ram- 
pin  collection  now  in  the  Louvre  (Fig.  37), 
which  deserves  more  than  a  passing  men- 
tion. In  contrast  to  the  athlete,  who  as  a 
youth  is  without  a  beard  and  has  short  hair,  the  Rampin  head  lias 
a  frisure  unsurpassed  in  elaboration  by  that  of  any  of  the  female 
figures,  and  rivalled  only  by  that  of  Fig.  30.  The  long,  old- 
fashioned  tresses  falling  down  back  of  the  ears  are  showy  enough  ; 
but  the  hair  of  the  crown  and  forehead  seem  to  shame  manhood. 
The  locks  falling  over  the  forehead  are  woven  of  several  strands 
and  terminate  in  rosettes.  The  mustache  is  shaven  in  the  sixth- 
1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  116. 


Fig.  36.  —  A  Youth  on  the 
Athenian  Akropolis. 


THE    ARCHAIC    PERIOD 


33 


century  style,  but  the  beard  is  most  carefully  plaited,  and  indeed 
looks  like  a  false  beard.  The  garland  of  oak  leaves  over  his  fore- 
head suggests  that  he  is  decked  out  lor  a  victory  in  an  athletic 
contest.  The  smiling  mouth,  almond  eves,  and  very  highly  set 
ears  mark  the  head  as  very 
archaic  Perhaps  somewhat 
looked  the  youthful  The- 
seus when  he  was  twitted  by 
some  peasants  for  looking 
like  a  girl.  Comparing  this 
head  with  I  g  30,  we  see 
how  they  represent  the  high- 
est pitch  of  elaboration, 
occurring  probably  about 
midway  between  the  Calf- 
bearer  and  the  yellow-haired 
Ephebos.  It  is  probable 
that  this  coiffure  was  an 
inheritance  from  Ionia,  and 
that  the  simple  Athenians 
of  the  time  of  the  Calf- 
bearer  had  been  transformed 

t      ■  1  ^,  •  Fig.  37.  —  The  Rampin  Head  .it  Paris, 

by   Ionian  elegance   to  this  J  F 

ree.     We  may  take,  then,  these  examples,  both  the  male  and 

the  fem  ile,  as  representing  the  flood  tide  of  Ionic  influence  at 

Athens. 

A    remarkable    series    of  horses    and    riders,    probably    votive 
•ending  over   a    period  of  .1    century,  shows   a   gradual 
•vie    parallel    to   that   whi<  h    comic,  ts    the   Calf 

rer  with  the  Ephebos  of  the  yellow  hair.'     One  horse,  at  about 
the  middle  of  the  bears  a  rider  with  jacket  and  trousers 

•  <  illy  painted,  apparently  representing  some  barbarian, 
perl:  i    ■  \t  the  end  of  the    series  we  have  two  .-\ 

1  Studn  ihrhuJi.  Winter,   fahrbueh)   B      1- 

1 


84 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


amples,  of  which  one  presents  to  us  an  almost  complete  horse 
and  one  leg  of  a  rider ;  the  other  presents  a  really  spirited 
horse  with   mane  finely   cropped    (Fig.  38).      There   are    holes 

showing  the  places  for 
the  bridles. 

Besides  the  figures 
of  maidens  and  youths, 
Athens  affords  a  seated 
figure  of  the  goddess 
Athena  (Fig.  39), 
marked  as  such  by  the 
aegis  with  the  gorgon's 
head  on  her  breast. 
It  is  reported  that  En- 
doios,  who  was  prob- 
ably an  Ionian  sculptor, 
although  sometimes  set 
down  as  an  Athenian, 
made  a  seated  Athena 
at  the  order  of  the 
rich  Kallias.  On  the 
strength  of  this  report, 
and  because  of  the 
place  where  it  was 
found,  this  Athena  has 
with  some  reason  been 
ascribed  to  Endoios.1 
Both  arms  are  detached 
from  the  body.  By  throwing  back  the  right  foot  the  sculptor  has 
given  the  intimation  that  she  may  rise  from  her  seat  and  act. 
She  is,  however,  linked  with  the  "  Maidens  "  by  the  long  locks 
falling  over  the  breast  and  by  the  crimpled  garment  below  the 
aegis.  A  curious  fold  of  drapery  falls  between  the  legs.  It 
appears  to  fall  from  the  seat  and  not  from  the  body. 

1  Paus.  1.  26. 4. 


Fig.  38.- 


Archaic  Horse.     (Athens,  Akropolis 
Museum.) 


THE    ARCHAIC    l'KRIOD 


85 


\  standing  Athena  Promachos  (Fig.  40)  is  represented  in 
several  small  bronze  figures,  also  from  the  Akropolis,  bearing 
helmet,  shield,  and  spear,  and  rushing  to  the  combat;  but  below 
the  breast  she  is  identical  with  the  "  Maidens."    The  sculptors  of 

the  time  knew  well  how  to  make  an  Athena  different  from  the 
"  Maidens.  "  Another  small 
bronze,1  made  of  two  flat 
plates  joined  together  at  the 
j,  shi  'A  S  \thena  with  her 
aegis,  but  without  other  war- 
like attributes.  She  presents 
a  perfect  profile  from  either 
side.  The  i\ce  of  the  god- 
dess and  the  stales  of  the 
-  are  gilded.  Her  hair 
and  dress  are  like  those  of 
the  "  Maidens."  But  her 
form  is  much  fuller.  The 
e  is  cold  and  pitiless,  with 
no  look  of  sympathy  with 
human  infirmities.  But  small 
as  is  the  figure,  it  is  one  <>t 
the  finest  examples  of  the 
art  of  the  time. 

era!  reliefs  in  marble, 
two  of  whi<  h  appear  to  be- 
long to  a  single  composition, 

rued  tie-    \kropolis.       I 

mosl   >trikmL;  of  these  i>  a 

person    mounting    a    <  hariot 


FIG.  39.  -    Seated  Atlieno.     (Alliens, 
Akropolis  Museum.) 


ami   leaning   forward   in  tl  A   small   pie<  e  of  an  adjai  <-iii 

slab   on    the    right,    fitting   exactly    to    tin-    main    piece,    shows   two 

tails   and   one    hind    leg,  all   of  which   seem   to   point   to   a 

th.iriot   at    re^t.      This   figure    has   long    been    known   and    adnmed 

1  r.ruiiii-l'.ruLkiiiaiin,  No.  Si./;    Von  M.ili,   ;|./. 


86 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


for  its  combination  of  grace  and  vigour.1  Several  questions  con- 
cerning it  are,  however,  still  in  debate.  Is  it  male  Or  female, 
and  is  it  divine  or  human?  Both  these  questions  might  be 
answered  definitely  if  the  head  were   not  so  badly  worn  away. 

The  second  slab,2  broken  off  below 
and  containing  only  the  upper  half 
of  a  figure  that  is  clearly  male,  in- 
stead of  settling  the  case  has  served 
to  complicate  it.  The  petasos  worn 
by  this  figure  has  led  to  its  being 
called  Hermes,  and  the  natural  inter- 
pretation of  the  other  figure  made  it 
also  some  divinity. 

The  hair  of  the  so-called  Hermes 
is  done  up  in  the  old  Attic  krobylos 
fashion  ;  and  since  the  other  figure 
had  the  same  coiffure,  it  was  natural 
to  interpret  it  also  as  male  in  spite 
of  its  slender  arms.  The  body  of  the 
supposed  Hermes  is  equally  slender. 
Effeminate  male  figures  are  not  un- 
paralleled in  Attic  art.  There  is  a 
notable  case  of  a  headless  draped 
male3  on  the  Akropolis  that  looks  in 
almost  every  respect  like  one  of  the 
"  Maidens."  It  must  be  conceded 
that  the  dress  of  the  charioteer  does  look  feminine.  A  long 
robe  was  the  usual  dress  of  charioteers. 

It  was  long  ago  seen  that  the  pieces  belonged  to  a  single  series. 
It  was  reserved  for  Schrader4  to  set  up  the  hypothesis  that  they 


FIG.  40.  —  Warrior  Athena. 
(Athens,  Akropolis  Museum.) 


1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  21 ;    Von  Mach,  56. 

2  Memorie  delP  Institute,  ii.  PI.  13.  3  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  551. 

4  Der  Cellafries  des  alten  Athenatempels,  Ath.  Mitt.  30  (1905),  305-322. 
Furtwangler,  Sitz.-ber.  der  Miinchener  Akad.  1905,  iii.  433  ft.,  suggested  that 
the  series  adorned  the  altar  of  Athena. 


THE    AR(  II  \K"    I'KRIOD 


87 


were  all  parts  of  .1  frieze  of  the  "  Oldest  Temple,''  which  l>ore  the 

Typhon  gable.     When  Peisistratos  had  enlarged  this  temple  by 

adding  a  colonnade  and    putting  a  larger  roof  over  the  whole, 

Schrader  supposes  that  the  oldest  temple,  which  still  continued  to 

form  the  cella  of  the  enlarged  one,  was  converted  into  the  Ionic 

order,  with  two  Ionic  columns  between  two  antae  at  each  end,  and 

that  at  the  same  time  an  Ionic  frieze  was  added  at  the  top  of  the 

old  cella  wall. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  we  have,  then,  part  of  a  chariot- 
frieze    antedating    similar    chariot-races   on    the    Parthenon 

frieze     by     a    century. 

Perhaps     the     earlier 

frieze,    like    the    later, 

had  mortal  charioteers. 

Ami  it  is  not  unlikely, 

if   they    were    mortals, 

that  they  were  males, 
figure  with  a  pet- 
has  very   slender 

claim  to  divinity.       If 

we  discard  the  notion 

that    he    is     Hermes, 

there  is  no  great  reason 

to    regard     the    other 

divinity. 

coiffure,  being  that 

which  is  mure  properly 

male  non  **  I  ler- 

."  befits  a  youthful  male  charioteer 


in 


41.—  Athena  accepting  <  ifferings. 
Akropolis  Museum.) 


(Athens, 


The  nei  k  also  is  stout 
to  belt  1  male.     The  drapery  of  the  figure  is  very 

m  1 1 1  •  .  til--  kind  that  ar<  liai^ti-    S<  ulptOTS  loved  to  reproduce. 

■  >ti\e  relief  may  1>--  here  notii  ed,  on  whit  h  Athena,  a  Blim 
tiding  her  <  hiton  very  high,  appears  anion-  her  worshippers 

.1    attitude,  without  the    legis   <  I  ig.    U  }.       The  worship 

>ftwo  id  of  both  sexes.     A  pair,  probably  man  and 


88  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

wife,  of  which  only  the  lower  parts  are  preserved,  approach  with 
offerings.  They  are  about  two  thirds  as  large  as  the  goddess. 
With  them  are  three  diminutive  figures,  two  males  and  one  female, 
the  former  bringing  offerings,  the  latter  looking  like  an  infinitesi- 
mal "  Maiden."  Along  with  them  walks,  perhaps  as  an  offering, 
an  enormous  sow.  A  greater  contrast  could  hardly  be  found 
than  that  between  the  smiling  Athena  in  the  circle  of  her  devout 
worshippers  and  the  stern,  terrible  goddess  formed  by  the  two 
plates  of  gilded  bronze. 

One  of  the  greatest  triumphs  in  art  studies  of  the  present  gen- 
eration has  been  the  reconstruction  in  part  of  the  main  gable  of 
the  Athena  temple  made  by  Peisistratos.  In  1863  a  female  head 
of  Parian  marble  and  about  life-size  was  found  on  the  Akropolis. 
It  was  early  recognized  as  belonging  in  the  circle  of  the  "  Maidens," 
but  raised  above  them  by  an  august  dignity  and  vigour  which  was 
entirely  foreign  to  them.  It  passed,  it  is  true,  for  an  example  of 
Attic  grace ;  but  it  was  much  more  than  that.  Its  significance 
was  gradually  revealed.  Up  to  about  1891  it  remained  set  up  on 
a  bracket,  although  in  1886  Studniczka1  had  shown  that  several 
large  pieces  of  a  draped  body  fitted  to  the  head.  In  1896,  after 
a  long  study  of  all  the  marble  fragments  on  the  Akropolis  which 
had  dark  veins  similar  to  those  in  the  fragments  already  identified, 
Hans  Schrader1  was  able  not  only  to  set  up  in  a  hall  of  the 
Akropolis  Museum  the  glorious  figure  of  the  goddess  delighting  in 
battle,  but  to  put  at  her  feet  a  falling  youthful  giant  whom  she  was 
piercing  with  her  spear  as  she  strode  onward  to  the  right  scatter- 
ing death  (Fig.  42).  Two  other  and  much  larger  giants,  almost 
wholly  restored,  were  shown  by  their  sloping  position  to  be  adapt- 
ing themselves  to  the  ascending  cornice  of  a  gable,  and  to  belong 
in  the  two  corners.  Four  other  figures  have  entirely  disappeared 
with  the  exception  of  insignificant  fragments.  Between  the  cen- 
tral group  of  Athena  with  the  young  giant  and  the  two  out- 
stretched giants,  filling  the  corners,  there  was  room  on  each  side 
for  another  giant  bending  forward  for  the  fray  and  confronted  by 
1  Ath.  Mitt.  11  (1886),  185  ff.  2  Ath.  Mitt.  22  (1897),  59'ff. 


THE   ARCHAIC    PERIOD 


89 


an  erect  divine  antagonist.  The  giants  in  the  corners  are  ready  to 
take  part;  but  the  real  combat  is  shared  only  by  three  gods  and 
three  giants,  and  is  resolved  into  three  duels.  The  divine  antag- 
onists helping  Athena  were  probably  Zeus  and  llerakles,  who 
fought  with  their  backs  turned  to  the  central  group. 


PtO,  42.  —  Athena  striking  down  .1  Youtl  I  Athens,  Akropolis  Museum.) 

All  three  of  the  giants  are  nude,  <  >f  the  two  in  the  comers 
one  has  a  head  in  a  separate  pie<  e  1  leverly  adjusted  to  the  body  ; 
the  otlx-r  once  had  a  head  of  the  same  pie<  e  as  the  body,  bul  it  is 
now  mostly  broken  away.  The  youthful  gianl  in  the  centre  I  u  lea 
a  head.     Bul   although  nude,  like  the  otl  ints,  he  wore  a 

helmet,    on  the  upper  side  of  the  lefl  hand  of  Athena  a  trans- 


9o  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

verse  cut  shows  traces  of  bronze  on  the  thumb  and  forefinger, 
which  proves  that  she  was  grasping  the  socket  of  the  fallen  giant's 
helmet  plume  with  her  left  hand,  while  with  her  right  she  drove 
the  spear  clear  through  him.  She  needed  no  shield.  At  her 
touch  he  must  sink  to  the  ground.  So  is  it  in  the  like  scene  on 
the  Pergamon  frieze.     Her  onward  rush  is  death  to  her  enemy. 

The  date  of  the  gable  is  usually  fixed  at  shortly  after  540  b.c. 
Peisistratos  was  then  in  possession  of  the  sovereign  power  to 
hold  it  during  his  life.  Since  he  came  to  his  victory  through 
the  help  of  Athena,  his  protector,  he  would  not  be  slow  to  show 
his  gratitude  by  some  conspicuous  memorial.  Her  enemies  were 
his.  They  were  both  champions  of  law  and  order.  Such  may  be 
the  sense  of  this  gable  group. 

The  giants  taken  singly  are  not  very  admirable.  The  anatomy 
is  bad.  The  contorted  antagonist  of  Athena  has  no  proper  medi- 
ation between  his  breast  and  the  lower  part  of  the  body.  The 
drawn-up  leg,  however,  is  admirable.  In  general,  it  is  flesh  rather 
than  muscle  that  makes  an  impression.  All  is  calculated  for  a  view 
from  below.  The  Aeginetan  gable  figures,  on  the  contrary,  are 
wrought  out  as  if  all  the  anatomical  details  were  to  be  inspected 
at  close  range.  In  the  grouping  there  is  also  a  contrast  to  the 
Aegina  gables  with  their  studied  symmetry  of  many  figures.  The 
Athens  group  was  composed  of  only  eight  figures,  which  were,  of 
course,  much  larger  than  the  twelve  or  perhaps  fourteen  figures 
on  the  west  garle  of  Aegina.  But  when  we  consider  that  the  gable 
was  far  larger  than  the  Aeginetan,  it  must  be  conceded  that  there 
were  more  empty  spaces  in  the  Athenian  gable. 

The  greatest  contrast  between  the  two  gables  is  this :  the 
Aeginetan  figures,  with  all  their  careful  anatomical  details,  are  lack- 
ing in  the  appearance  of  life.  They  are  as  if  spellbound,  without 
the  power  to  awake  and  act,  while  the  Athenian  figures  make  the 
rush  and  struggle  apparent. 

It  is  only  in  the  dress  that  Athena  is  like  the  "  Maidens."  She 
is  unlike  them  in  what  is  essential.  One  sees  in  her  face  pitiless 
wrath  flashing  forth  as  she  strikes  down  her  foe.     She  moves  in 


mi:  archaic   l'Kkion 


91 


glory  a<  ross  the  si  ene.    What  a  contrast  to  the  Aeginetan  Athenas, 

\vh«>  occupied  in  solemn,  death-like  gravity 
a  similar  place  in  their  gables  ! 

Taint  was  judiciously  applied.  The  gar- 
ments of  Athena  were  painted  much  as 
were  those  of  the  "  Maiden-.''  But  she 
wore  a  helmet  painted  blue,  with  gilt  rosettes 
along  it-  lower  border.  Her  hair  was  red. 
The  aegis  had  red,  blue,  and  green  scales 
and  a  border  <<\  snakes  whose  heads  pro- 
truded here  and  there  from  its  edge. 

Most  of  the  sculptures  of  this  period  in 
Attika  outside  of  the  Akropolis  are  funereal 
monument-,  generally  in  relief.  It  is  worthy 
of  note  that  neatly  all  of  them,  as  well  as 
.<•  reliefs  on  the  Akropolis,  are  of  Pentelic 
marble. 

The  stele  of  Aristion  (Fig.  43),  found  in 
1  -  (8  at  Yelanide/a,  near  the  eastern  shore 
of  Attika,  about  ten  miles  south  of  Marathon, 
_ :     t  burial  mound,  is  practically 
intact.     Although  now  deprived  of  its  isola- 
tion by  subsequent  discoveries,  it  is  still  the 
irtant   monument  of  its  class  and 
of  th(  isures  of  the  National 

1    11    Athens.     <  m  the  -tele,  which 
taper>  slightly  towards   the   top,  we   have  in 

very  low  rein-!  an   Attic   hoplite  of  about 
.,  in  what  we  may  <  ill  a  '\r<-^  parade 
attitude.      I         ead  warrior  is  seen  here  as 
h<-  lived,  at  his  1  l\    i  >r  b  ittle,  with 

all  his  armour  on.     It  is,  however,  the  traces 
•  paint  which  give  the  stele  Ms  1  hief importance.    The  bai  kground 
ted  red,  the  figure  in  various  colours.     The  helmet  m 
dark  blur,  the  h.ur  reddish  brown,  the  «  uirass  probably  dark  brown, 


FIG.  .) j.      Aristion's  Si 
:  Athens,   National    Mu- 
seum.) 


92  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

in  imitation  of  leather.  This  shows  three  horizontal  bands  of 
meanders  and  zigzags  in  blue.  On  the  right  shoulder  piece, 
representing,  perhaps,  metal,  are  a  star  and  a  lion's  head.  The 
double  flaps  of  the  cuirass,  the  fine  folds  of  the  linen  garment 
coming  out  from  under  them,  and  the  metallic  greaves  through 
which  appear  the  form  of  the  knees  and  calves,  the  hair  carefully 
arranged  in  curls,  the  fine  lines  of  the  beard  given  in  detail,  all 
show  the  scrupulous  care  bestowed  on  this  relief.  With  the  top 
part,  now  broken  off,  went  the  warrior's  plume,  which  once  came 
down  over  his  shoulder,  as  is  shown  by  the  dowel-hole  just  above 
it.  Had  Athens  left  no  other  work  of  the  sixth  century,  we 
should  still  have  a  vivid  picture  of  the  citizen  soldier  of  that 
time,  whose  character  inspires  respect. 

There  are  faults  in  the  drawing.  The  right  hand  recalls  those 
of  the  old  Apollos  in  the  position  of  the  thumb  ;  the  right  leg  and 
buttock  are  exaggerated ;  the  whole  figure  is  crowded  against 
the  rear  border  of  the  stele  ;  although  the  figure  is  in  profile,  the 
eye  is  in  archaic  fashion,  as  if  seen  from  in  front. 

Haifa  century  ago,  when  this  figure  was  practically  the  sole  rep- 
resentative of  archaic  Attic  art,  Brunn  used  it  as  an  example  of 
what  Attic  art  was  in  contrast  to  Aeginetan,  declaring  that  the 
former  was  characterized  by  dignity  and  grace  of  the  whole  effect, 
the  latter  by  the  finer  study  of  nature  in  details.  Although  this 
generalization  was  made  on  insufficient  material,  it  stands  to-day 
abundantly  corroborated. 

Although  the  stele  has  lost  some  of  its  unique  importance  by  the 
discovery  of  a  duplicate  stele  at  Ikaria,1  it  is  still  the  most  perfect 
of  all  the  old  Attic  grave  reliefs.  A  good  many  other  Attic  reliefs 
more  or  less  resembling  it  have  come  to  light.2 

Shortly  after  its  discovery,  when  the  history  of  sculpture  lacked 
perspective,  it  was  customary  to  call  this  figure  the  "  Soldier  of 
Marathon."  But  when  the  history  of  Greek  sculpture  got  its 
proper  perspective,  the  warrior  resumed  the  name  that  was  given 
him  on  his  monument.     On  the  band  below  his  feet  the  name  of 

1  A.J.A.  5  (1889),  9.  2  Conze,  Attische  Grabreliefs,  early  numbers. 


THK    ARCHAIC    PERK  >1> 


93 


the  sculptor,  Aristokles,  is  cut  The  slab  ended  in  a  sort  of  stump 
which  fitted  into  a  base  on  which  the  name  of  the  dead  was  in- 
scribed. His  real  name  is  Aristion.  He  might  have  been  a  grand- 
father to  one  of  the  "  men  of  Marathon."  ' 

A  stele1'  iouiul  a  year  later  at  the  same  place  as  the  Aristion  stele, 
when  cleared  from  incrustation  about  forty  years  later,  showed  the 
noble  figure  of  a  man  of  the  same  age  as  Aristion  officiating  as  a 
priest.      In  this  .is  in  several  others,  the   figure  was  in  paint 

only,  upon  smooth  marble.  The  figure  was  painted,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  Aristion  stele,  of  lighter  colours;  while  the  background 
on  which  it  was  projected  was  dark  red.  The  colours  early  disap- 
peared and  left  the  surface  exposed  to  corrosion  ;  but  the  strong 
colour  protected  the 
marble  longer.  Ac- 
cordingly, the  figure 
is  now  dark,  while  the 
background  is  light. 

The  top  part  of  a 
stele  containing  a 
head,  found  in  i  S73 
in  an  old  wall  near 
the  I  )i pylon  gate,  is 
too  important  to  be 
passed  over  |  Fig.  44). 
Here  a  youthful  athlete  holds  a  discus  in  his  left  hand,  so  poised 
that  his  head  is  projected  upon  it  in  relief  as  on  a  nimbus. 
The   top   of  the   head    is   broken   away;   but    we  have   all   the  very 

archait    features,  the  almond-shaped  eye  in   full,  the  prominent 

with    great    knobs,  the   thick   lips   making  an    archaic    smile. 

1       chin  and  neck,  however,  are  both  strong  and  graceful.     The 

thumb  outlined  against  the  diS4  US  is  slender.      The  lobe  of  the  ear 

is  monstrous.     The  tightly  twisted  braid  of  the  hair,  truly  athletic, 

1  I  h>-   lacV    of  the   dem<  name  which  was   usually   appended   to   names 

aft'-r  Kl< )  ;m  I..'  .    is  enough  t"  show  thai  A r ist i. .11  is  ol  earlier  date. 

liefi,  l'l.  1. 


Fig.  44. 


Archaic  I  •iscus-thrower. 
National  M  useum.) 


(Atl 


94  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

conceals  the  transition  from  the  head  to  the  discus,  which  is  poised 
in  the  attitude  of  "  parade  rest." 

Since  the  stele  is  seen  to  broaden  considerably  downward,  the 
breadth  of  about  a  foot  and  two  inches  at  the  top  would  be  increased 
at  the  bottom  to  about  two  feet  and  a  half.  This  suggests  that 
the  figure  was  represented  with  feet  apart,  as  if  in  the  act  of  hurling 
the  discus. 

Philios  has  recognized  in  a  relief  found  at  Eleusis1  a  hoplite  who 
is  a  real  Marathonomachos  ;  and  there  is  much  that  speaks  in  his 
favour.  The  hoplite  is  nude,  but  carries  his  shield  and  spear,  and 
wears  an  enormous  helmet.  He  is  full  of  strenuous  action.  In 
fact,  he  might  be  supposed  to  be  the  fabled  runner  who  spent  his 
last  breath  in  bringing  the  news  of  victory  from  Marathon,  and  sank 
in  death  as  he  breathed  out  the  glorious  cry,  "  ^lkw/jlev."  The 
attitude  of  an  absolutely  spent  runner  is  marked  by  the  manner 
in  which  he  clutches  at  his  breast  for  breath.  The  style,  too, 
accords  better  with  that  of  490  B.C.  than  with  that  of  Aristion, 
which  is  a  quarter  of  a  century  earlier. 

It  was  perfectly  natural  that  figures  like  the  Akropolis  "  Maidens  " 
should  be  found  at  Eleusis,  since  Eleusis  in  the  sixth  century  was 
a  part  of  Athens,  and  Peisistratos  extended  his  activities  thither. 
He  built  an  enlarged  hall  for  the  mysteries.  We  have,  by  good 
fortune,  one  of  the  architectural  adornments,  a  splendid  ram's 
head,2  perhaps  the  finest  example  of  animal  sculpture  preserved 
from  the  archaic  period. 

Boeotia.  —  Other  influences  were  operative  where  there  was  ap- 
parently never  a  local  school.  The  stele  of  Orchomenos  (Fig.  45), 
now  in  the  National  Museum,  was  made  by  a  Naxian  sculptor,  who 
was  so  proud  of  his  work  that  he  inscribed  on  its  lower  border, 
"  Alxenor  of  Naxos  made  me,  just  look  at  me."  A  man  perhaps 
somewhat  older  than  Aristion  is  before  us,  admirably  adjusted  to 
the  field  of  the  relief.  His  head  is  bent  forward  ;  his  left  hand  is 
slipped  down  his  long  staff,  which  forces  itself  up  into  the  folds  of 
his  long  cloak.  He  looks  kindly  down  upon  a  dog  of  the  grey- 
1  Ephem.  Arch.  1903,  43-56.  2  A.J.  A.  2  (1898),  PI.  8. 


THE    ARCHAIC    l'KRIOl) 


95 


hound  type,  with  a  long,  sharp  nose,  and  holds  out  to  him  a  lo- 
cust What  a  difference  between  him  and  Aristion  !  There  we  had 
the  stiffness  of  dress  parade,  here  is  the  bent  head  and  the  hand 
supported  bj  a  si  iff  that  seems  to  be  driven 
into  his  cloak.  The  feet  partake  so  much 
of  the  neglige  attitude  that  one  can  hardly 
tell  which  is  the  right  and  which  the  left. 
In  fact  this  seemingly  easy  position  is  abso- 
lutely impossible.  The  dog,  too,  in  his 
efforts  to  reach  the  locust  is  contorted  out 
of  nature,  his  head  being  turned  as  on  a 
swivel,  outdoing  the  contortions  of  the 
Nike  of  1  >elos.  lie  also  rests  his  fore 
paws  on  the  raised  border  of  the  relief. 
But  it  is  the  breath  of  life  that  interest  us  ; 
and  here  is  real  life,  though  awkwardly  ex- 
pressed. We  have  a  Boeotian  landowner 
walking  over  his  fields  with  his  faithful 
dog. — We  miss  the  paint  which  doubtless 
once  existed.  The  head  probably  once- 
had  hair  above  the  fillet,  painted.  I  ess 
likely  is  a  metallic  cap,  which  has  been 
A  relief  in  the  Naples  Museum 
has  the  same  subject  with  variations.     The 

g,  of  the  same  type,  has  his  hind  feet 
planted  on  the  ground  ;  but  his  head  is 
turned  around  and  upward,  as  on  the 
Orchom  tele.     The  locust,  however, 

which  gave  the  reason   for  the  contorted 

:ion,   is  la<kmg.     The   form   of  the   right   hand   demands  the 
locust  or  some  similar  objd  t. 

In  most  respe<  ts  the   Naples   relief  is  quite   superior  to  the 
others.    There   i->  less  drapery  and   more  anatomy.     The    legs, 

shown    almost    entire,    .ire    better    both    m    form    and     in    pla< 
1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  N0.416;   Von  Macb,  349a, 


45-  —  A 
ng    with 
(Athi 
seum.) 


I '.'  leotian 

his     l  log. 

National     Mu- 


96  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

The  same  is  true  of  the  arms  and  breast.  As  for  the  head,  it 
seems  a  generation  later  than  the  Orchomenos  head,  and  might 
even  make  the  Naples  stele  fall  out  of  the  period  under  discussion. 

By  good  fortune  there  has  been  discovered  at  Apollonia  on 
the  west  shore  of  the  Black  Sea,  and  brought  to  the  Bulgarian 
Museum  at  Sophia,  another  replica  of  the  same  scene,  with  this 
variation,  that  the  man  holds  out  to  the  dog  a  large  bone.  This 
copy,  though  more  battered  than  the  others,  is  in  point  of  art 
greatly  superior  to  them.1  It  may  be  that  it  was  the  proto- 
type, which  the  Naples  example  certainly  cannot  be.  The  wide 
distribution  of  the  three  examples  makes  the  place  of  the  origin 
of  the  type  doubtful.  The  Naples  copy  is  thought  to  be  from 
one  of  the  Aegean  islands;  and  thus  the  Ionic  origin  can  hardly 
be  doubted.  Neither  can  it  be  doubted  that  the  prototype  en- 
joyed great  celebrity. 

Thessaly.  —  In  this  period  Thessaly  enjoyed  the  presence  of 
such  poets  as  Anakreon  and  Simonides.  Of  its  artists  we  know 
little,  but  the  relief2  found  at  Pharsalos  half  a  century  ago,  and 
long  called  "  the  elevation  of  the  flower,"  is  probably  a  grave 
monument,  and  is  one  of  the  most  charming  relics  of  archaic  art. 
Beauty  and  solemnity  pervade  the  scene.  Two  women  are  holding 
up  to  each  other  fruit  and  flowers,  the  latter  looking  like  toad- 
stools. One  is  reminded  of  similar  scenes  on  the  Harpy  Monu- 
ment; but  here  is  great  advance.  Head,  body,  arms,  and  hands 
show  beautiful  forms.  The  elaborate  head-dress  marks  the  women 
as  high-bred.  That  the  relief  is  earlier  than  500  b.c.  is  rendered 
probable  by  the  severity  of  expression,  especially  in  the  eyes, 
which  are  shown  in  full,  the  stiff  attitudes,  and  the  schematic  folds 
of  the  garments. 

Delphi.  —  That  both  Olympia  and  Delphi  were  important  centres 
of  artistic  activity  from  540  to  480  B.C.  is  undoubted.  Olympia, 
however,  had  little  to  show,  while  Delphi  had  much.  Besides 
maidens  of  the  Akropolis  type,   there  were  male  figures  of  the 

1  Jahrbuch  (Anzeiger}  1896,  137. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  58;   Von  Mach,  358. 


THK    ARCHAIC    l'KKlOD 


97 


lo  type  which  may  represent   Kleobis  and   Biton  of  Argos.1 

There  are  also  metopes  of  an  elongated  shape  from  the  Treasury 
of  the  Sikyonians.  One'-'  of  these  rej)resents  Europa  on  a  bull,  in 
which  she  shows  much  more  activity  than  in  the  Selinus  metope, 
where,  in  order  to  get   her  into  the  field,  the  sculptor  bent  the 


:  oi  Warriors  from  the    ["reasurj  >>i  ih<-  Sikyonians 
at  Delphi. 

bull's  back  down  into  an  unnatural  curve.     The  bull  is  a  splendid 
animal  compared  with  that  of  the  Selinus  metope.    The  drapery 

Of  Euro]      18  also  superior. 

The  second  metope  shows  three  hei  turning  from  a  cattle- 

liftiii  edition    (Fig.   46).    These  heroes,  whose  heads  arc 

1  Hdt  1.  |x;    Homolle,  />'. <  .11.  24  (iyoo),  450. 
(tlUi  Je  Delphei  iv.  l'l.  J, 


98 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


THE    ARCHAIC    PERIOD  99 

badly   battered,   carry   two   spears  each.     Their   long  braids  of 

hair  falling  over  their  shoulders  look  so  archaic  as  to  make  it 
proper  to  place  them  into  the  first  archaic  period.  The  ho. ids 
of  the  nigh  oxen,  below  the  other  heads   in    profile,  appear   in 

front  view  between  the  human  bodies  in  an  extremely  stiff  and 
almost  comical  manner;  while  the  attempt  to  show  the  full 
number  of  legs  of  the  cattle  results  in  a  multiplicity  of  parallel 
lines 

The  metopes  of  the  Sikyonian  Treasury  properly  belong  to  the 
fir>t  archaic  period  ;  but  for  the  sake  of  comparison  with  the 
Knidian  frieze  we  may  treat  them  together.  This  magnificent 
frieze  probably  falls  in  the  period  between  500  and  485  b.C. 
Two  "Maidens"  serve  as  supports  for  its  porch.  The  frieze  is 
practically  intact,  and  its  figures  form  the  most  impressive  series 
of  archaic  art.  Here  come  into  play  both  action  and  grace. 
Fine  carving  ami  judicious  application  of  polychromy  are  wedded. 
For  the  convenience  of  beholders  the  names  of  the  chief  actors 
are  inscribed  on  the  borders  below.  We  have  a  battle  between 
Homeric  warriors,  with  seated  divinities  watching  the  fray;  a 
battle  of  the  gods  and  giants;  the  carrying  oil"  of  the  daughters 
of  LeukippOS;  and  a  fourth  subject  which  cannot  be  surely  identi- 
fied. Figure  .17  represents  the  horses  of  a  quadriga  and  two 
horses  with  riders,  rivalling  the  similar  scenes  On  the  Parthenon 
frieze.  Figure  48  reproduces  a  part  of  the  battle  between  the 
and  the  giants.  Everywhere  the  details,  such  as  the  garments 
and  hair  of  the  figures  and  the  mains  and  tails  of  the  horses, 
show   tin-    mosl    exquisite    archaic    art.     'I  hoc    figures    show   that 

the  Parthenon  frieze  was  not  without  its  forerunners.    Undoubtedly 

this  frieze,  and  perhaps  many  more  like  it,  were  familiar  to  Attic- 
artists  of  the  time  of  I'heidias. 

Selinus.       We  turn  again  to  tin-  extreme  west,  where  we  find 

that,  siii'  tesque  metopes  of  temple  C  were  made,  ait  had 

ed   in    Selinus.      The    <  ity  having  spread    until    it   filled    its 

■kropolis,   1  temple  designated  as  temple  /•',  to  be  flanked  later 

bj   tem]  :   '/.  built  upon  a  plateau  about  a  mile  to  the 


too  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

east  of  the  city.  It  had  ten  metopes  on  its  eastern  front.  Of 
only  two  of  these  are  there  fragments  worth  mentioning ;  these 
are  two  lower  halves.  Each  contains  a  god  or  goddess  overthrow- 
ing a  giant.  In  one  case1  the  giant  is  halting  upon  his  right  knee, 
the  other  being  bent  as  he  is  pressed  violently  downward  by  a 
divine  antagonist,  who  is  possibly  male,  and  wears  a  garment  reach- 
ing only  to  the  knee.  The  second  fragment2  is  still  more  impres- 
sive. Here  a  goddess,  probably  Athena,  has  completely  overthrown 
her  antagonist,  and  is  planting  her  foot  remorselessly  upon  his  thigh 
as  she  transfixes  him  with  a  spear,  probably  represented  in  paint. 
Somewhat  so  appeared  Athena  in  the  Akropolis  gable.  The 
drapery,  as  far  as  we  have  it,  is  not  unlike  hers.  The  giant  is  still 
struggling  with  his  left  hand  to  keep  his  head  from  the  ground. 
But  it  is  falling  backward  over  his  left  shoulder,  while  his  mouth, 
with  both  rows  of  teeth  displayed,  is  emitting  his  death  rattle  ; 
meanwhile  his  beard  remains  carefully  arranged  in  three  parallel 
bands  on  cheek  and  chin. 

In  general  there  is  little  profit  in  discussing  sculptors  who  have 
left  no  works  by  which  we  may  judge  them.  There  are,  however, 
two  schools  of  sculpture  that  were  active  in  the  period  under 
consideration,  to  which  we  can  assign  extant  works  only  by  con- 
jecture, but  which  on  account  of  their  historical  importance  can- 
not be  passed  over  without  discussion.  One  of  these  is  the  Argive 
school,  which  was  devoted  mainly  to  sculpture  of  athletes.  Work- 
ing as  it  did  in  bronze,  it  has  left  hardly  any  examples  by  which 
it  may  be  judged.  Had  we  ten  out  of  the  thousands  of  bronze 
statues  which  filled  Olympia  and  Delphi,  to  say  nothing  of  Argos 
itself,  we  should  know  something  of  Argive  art ;  whereas  we  now 
guess  and  grope  almost  blindly. 

Old  Argive  School.  —  One  great  name  confronts  us  at  the  outset, 
Hagelaidas,  whom  tradition  made  to  be  the  teacher  of  Myron,  Poly- 
kleitos,  and  Pheidias.  We  have  no  trace  of  the  works  which  he  is 
said  to  have  made,  but  the  single  bronze  statuette  from  Ligourio,3 

1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  289/'.  2  Ibid.,  No.  289  a. 

8  Furtwangler,  jo/at  Berliner  Winckelmannsprogram  (1890),  125-153,  PI.  I. 


THE    ARCHAIC     PERIOD 


101 


near  Epidauros,  without  doubt  an  Argive  work,  has  generally  been 
taken  to  represent  his  style.  The  figure  is  very  stocky  ;  the  head 
has  heavy  jaws  and  chin,  a  straight  mouth,  and  strongly  worked 
eyelids  ;  in  fa<  t  just  what  we  should  expect  from  a  forerunner  of 
PolykleitOS.  This  figure  has  been  made  a  pivotal  point  in  art 
history.  We  must  concede  that  this  pivotal  point  rr>N  on  an 
unproved  assumption.      If,  however,  we  make  a  bold  use  of  the 

mption,  certain  important  results  fall  into  line.     The  Ligourio 
bronze  has  a  very  serious  coun- 
tenance.    We   have    seen   that  ><^ 
just  at  the  end  of  the  archaic 
period    in    Athens    a    reaction 
took  place  against  the  smiling 

s,  both  male  and  female, 
and,  as  often  happens  in  revo- 
lutions, the  pendulum  swung 
to  the  opposite  extreme.  Now 
we  have  seen  Athens  to  be  a 
ready  borrower,  ever  reaching 
out  for  what  was  best  ;  and 
nothing  is  more  probable  than 
that,  dissatisfied  with  her  own 
work,  she  should  turn  to  Argos, 
where  sculpture  was  cradled, 
for  new  lessons, —  perhaps  for  new  teachers.  On  the  Athenian 
Akropolifl  there  came  to  light  a  bronze  head,  about  two  thirds 
life-size,  which  seems  at  variance  with  the  Smiling  creatures 
found    near    it,   showing    a   serious    if   not    a  sad     face    (Fig.    49). 

exquisite  that  it  (an  only  be   regarded  as  the 

work  of  a  ma-t<-r  «>f  a  finished  bron/e  style.     One  would  hardly 

■  1  Athens  in  the  archaic  period  for  a  master  of  bronze  style. 

must  have  been  as  scarce  there  as  they  were   plentiful 

in     \f  It    IS    not    Overbold neSS    to    infer    that    we    have    here 

a  product  of  the  Argive  school  and  that  this  figure,  or  similar 

lit   about    a   revolution    in   the  art   ol  Athens  JUSl    before 


FIG.  49.  —Archaic  Bronze  Head. 
(Athens,  Akropolis  Museum.) 


102 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


the  Persian  War.  This  head  has  not  only  a  serious  mouth,  but  a 
strong  chin  and  heavy  upper  eyelids,  combined  with  extraordi- 
narily fine  treatment  of  the  hair,  and  even  delicate  eyelashes  of 
fine  bronze  wire.  It  is  extremely  doubtful  whether  an  Athenian 
artist  ever  produced  such  a  bronze  head.  It  would  be  a  greater 
anomaly  than  the  production  of  a  most  elaborate  Athenian 
"  Maiden "  at  Argos.  A  strong  bond  connects  this  head  also 
with  the  Apollo  of  the  west  gable  at  Olympia.  But  of  that  we 
shall  speak  later. 

A  striking  relief  in  Copenhagen  presents  Orestes  taking  ven- 
geance on  Aegisthos  for  the  slaughter  of  Agamemnon  (Fig.  50). 


Fig.  50.  —  Death  of  Aegisthos.     (Copenhagen  Museum.) 


Orestes  here  appears  as  an  ai/a£  av8pwv  with  a  righteous  cause  for 
bloodshed.  The  vile  Aegisthos  is  falling  to  the  ground  from  the 
thrust  of  the  two-edged  sword.  His  bowels  protrude.  Klytem- 
nestra,  the  mother,  lays  her  hand  on  her  son's  shoulder  as  if  to 
stay  his  wrath.  But  Electra's  sarcastic  look  at  her  mother  indi- 
cates that  no  mercy  even  for  her  is  to  be  expected.  The  servants 
on  the  ends  give  vent  to  their  grief  by  expressive  attitudes.    Naught 


THE    ARCHAIC    PERIOD  .03 

will  avail  to  save  the  murderess.  This  relief  is  probably  Argive, 
ami  is  one  of  the  most  splendid  remains  of  antiquity.  The 
magnificent  archaic  figures  are  full  of  the  wrath  that  was  kindled 
in  the  house  of  the  son  of  Atreus. 

Sikyon.  — The  other  early  Peloponnesian  school  of  note  is  that 
of  Sikyon.  This  school  was  closely  affiliated  with  that  of  Argos, 
and,  like  it,  worked  almost  exclusively  in  bronze,  so  that  it  might 
almost  be  set  down  as  a  branch  of  the  same  school ;  and  it  is  not 
orange  that,  a  generation  later,  we  find  Polvkleitos  mentioned  as 
belonging  to  both  Argos  and  Sikyon. 

Early  in  the  first  archaic  period  the  Cretans,  Dipoinos  and 
Skvllis,  had  worked  in  Sikyon,  and  a  generation  later  another 
Cretan.  Aristokles,  became  the  head  of  the  Sikyonian  school,  and 
his  family  was  active  there  for  eight  generations.  His  two  grand- 
sons, Aristokles  and  Kanachos,  doubtless  fall  into  the  second  ar- 
chaic period.  It  is  Kanachos  whom  we  need  to  dwell  upon.  He 
seems  to  have  been  a  prolific  sculptor.  Hut  he  is  best  known  as 
the  maker  of  the  cultus  statue  of  the  Branchidae  temple,  the 
Apollo  Philesii  s,  of  Aeginetas  bronze.  So  famous  was  it  that 
Dareios  carried  it  off  to  Kkbatana,  where  it  remained  nearly  two 
centuries,  when  it  was  returned  in  306  B.c.  by  Seleukos  Nikator. 
Coins  of  Miletos,  l>oth  in  early  and  in  late  times,  reproduce  this 
Apollo.  In  all  cases  he  stands  holding  the  fawn  in  his  right  hand 
and  a  bow  m  his  left.  <  >ne  late  coin  of  C.ordianus  III  shows  him 
in  this  attitude  inside  the  temple.  A  bronze  statuette  in  the 
British  Museum,'  the  Payne  Knight  bronze,  represents  an  archaic 
Apollo  in  the   same   attitude.      In   this  case   the  bow  is  gone  from 

the  left  hand,  but  it  is  .  lear  that  the  fingers  on,  e  1  lasped  it.     The 

bronze  statu-     once  in  the  S<  iarra   Palace  in  Rome,  also  archaic, 

.^  to  have  held   a   fawn   in  his   right   hand,  while   the  whole  left 

arm,  whi<  h  is  new,  holds  a  horn  of  plenty  '  An  an  hue  st  ituette 
from  N  ttitude  of  the  hands,  but  in  the  right  we 

find  an  aryballos.      but  sin-  e  nothing  <  Ollld  be  more  absurd  than  an 

1  I  ,wlir  and  Wl  |ii  Fig.  -S' 

illignon,  L  I  ig.  161,  id,  i.  1  ig.  1 


io4 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


oil  flask  in  one  hand  and  a  bow  in  the  other,  it  may  be  suspected 
that  the  maker  of  the  statuette  converted  the  Apollo  into  an  ath- 
lete by  supplying  the  oil  flask.  It  needs  no  violence  to  class  this 
statuette  with  the  others.  The  famous  bronze  statuette  found  at 
Piombino  in  Tuscany,  now  in  the  Louvre,  a  gem  of  art  in  true 

.  archaic  style,  probably  bore  the  fawn  on 
the  outstretched  right  palm  and  the  bow 
in  the  clasped  left  (Fig.  51).  This,  with 
the  other  statuettes,  may  give  us  some  idea 
of  what  the  Apollo  of  Kanachos  was  like.1 
Kanachos  made  also  at  Thebes  a  statue 
of  the  Ismenian  Apollo,  in  cedar  wood,  so 
like  the  Milesian  figure  that  Pausanias  says 
that  no  one  who  had  seen  it  could  doubt 
that  Kanachos  made  the  Theban  statue 
also.  Kanachos'  activity  in  Boeotia  as  a 
maker  of  one  Apollo  statue  has  suggested 
that  another  statue 2  in  marble  found  at 
the  Ptoion,  of  a  considerably  later  date 
than  the  Boeotian  figures  of  the  stolid  type, 
might  be  a  replica  of  his  Theban  statue. 
But  the  Ptoion  Apollo  has  such  evident 
affinities  with  the  Aeginetan  gable  figures 
that  it  may  with  more  propriety  be  assigned 
to  that  school.  We  are  now  approaching 
the  crossing  of  the  ways.  The  schools 
have  various  affiliations  one  with  another. 
Authorities  begin  to  differ  widely  as  to  the 
assignment  of  certain  statues.  Such  is  the  case  with  the  bronze 
head  from  Kythera,3  where  the  heavy  chin  of  the  Argive  school 
is  combined  with  a  smile  (Fig.  52). 

1  On  this  question  see  Kekule  von  Stradonitz,  Sitz.-ber.  d.  Berl.  Akad.  1904, 
786-801. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  12 a;   Von  Mach,  15^. 

8  Many  are  inclined   to  put  this  head  into  the  first  archaic  period.     It 


FlG.  51.  —  Bionze  Statu 
ette  from  Piombino 
(Louvre.) 


THE   ARCHAIC    PERIOD 


105 


Aegina.  Aegina,  an  island  about  ten  miles  distant  from  IVi- 
raeus,  formed  a  state,  and  a  notable  one,  though  at  the  battle  of 
Salamis  it  furnished  only  thirty  triremes,  while  Athens  furnished  one 
hundred  and  eighty.  When  the  Athenians  took  possession  oi  the 
island  in  456  b.(  .,  they  cap- 
tured seventy  triremes,  and 
still  others  escaped.  Aegina 
-  doubtless  to  be  reck- 
oned with  as  1  naval  power 
at  the  time  of  the  Persian 
Wars ;  but  its  great  days, 
reaching  back  almost  to  the 
Mycenaean  period,  were  al- 
ready in  the  p  1st.  Between 
490  and  480  b.(  .  Themis- 
tokles  had  broken  its  power 
and  Athens  had  eclipsed  it. 
But    with    only    twenty- four 

r>     more    to    live    as     a 
free  state   Aegina  added   at 

imis  a  glorious   page  to 
her  hi-'  intributing  so 

much  to  the  defeat  of  the 
Persians  that  the  states  participating  in  the  battle  awarded  her 
the  prize  for  valour.  Probably  jealousy  of  Athens  played  a  part 
in  this  award  ;  so  that  more  than  ever  Aegina  was  felt  by 
Athens  to  be  an  "eyesore  to  Peiraeus,"  and  her  "inevitable 
hour "  can 

Of  her  art  we  should  probably  have  known  nothing  worth  tell- 

•    had   not   a   1.  1    temple    in   the   northeast    corner   of  the 

island,  remote  from  die  1  ity,  early  shed  its  gable  sculptures,  to  be 

covered  up  by  accumulated  rubbish  and  soil. 

In  181 1  an  international  party  of  English  and  <  Germans  spent  a 
I  thought  t"  be  Aphrodite,  chiefly  perhapi  !»•>  auie  it  wai  found 


FlG,   52.       Vrchaii   Bronze  I  [ead  from 
Kythera.     (Berlin  Museum.) 


106  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

few  weeks  in  clearing  away  this  debris  in  order  to  secure  a  plan 
and  elevation  of  the  temple.  At  the  very  outset  they  came  upon 
sculpture.  At  the  end  of  their  work  they  had  secured,  besides 
small  fragments,  substantial  remains  of  fifteen  figures,  ten  of  which 
were  assigned  to  the  west  gable  and  five  to  the  east  gable,  with 
parts  of  two  figures  forming  an  akroterion  surmounting  one  of  the 
gables.  The  statues  did  not  at  first  make  a  deep  impression  ; 
and  after  some  wandering  about,  they  were  sold  for  $30,000  to  the 
Crown  Prince  of  Bavaria,  afterwards  Ludwig  I.  ;  and  in  1828 
found  their  way  into  the  Glyptothek  at  Munich.  Before  that,  how- 
ever, the  famous  Danish  sculptor,  Thorwaldsen,  had  been  given  the 
task  of  "  restoring  "  them  in  Italy.  When  he  had  finished  his 
task,  he  declared  that  he  could  not  tell  the  parts  that  he  had 
added  from  the  original  parts.  He  had  not  scrupled  to  add  here 
and  there  a  head  of  his  own  making.1  He  also  set  the  statues 
up  on  independent  bases.  Of  course,  it  was  a  pity  that  this 
treasure  did  not  lie  in  the  ground  fifty  years  longer,  until  the  age 
of  scientific  excavation  had  arrived.  But  in  spite  of  all  this  mal- 
practice these  sculptures  form  one  of  the  most  important  docu- 
ments in  the  history  of  Greek  art.  Without  them  we  should  have 
had  a  great  gap. 

As  the  figures  are  set  up  in  the  Glyptothek  the  two  gable  groups 
seem  similar,  each  representing  a  combat  between  two  bands  of 
warriors  rushing  forward  from  the  right  and  the  left,  while  in  the 
middle  a  helmeted  goddess,  marked  by  the  aegis  as  Athena, 
stands  stiffly,  facing  to  the  front,  as  if  calling  a  halt  to  the  hostile 
bands.  A  fallen  warrior  lies  nearly  in  front  of  her.  Two  spear- 
men and  an  archer  are  pressing  toward  the  central  group  on  either 
side.     In  each  gable  corner  lies  a  man  mortally  wounded. 

Thorwaldsen's  restoration,  which  rested  largely  on  data  furnished 
by  Cockerell,  the  fortunate  discoverer,  placed  only  ten  figures 
in  the  restored  west  gable  ;  while  no  attempt  was  made  at  com- 
pleting the  other  group.  But  since  a  figure  of  the  east  gable 
was  clearly  leaning  forward  to  seize  the  fallen  warrior  next  to 
1  E.g.  that  of  the  first  spearman  on  the  left  in  the  west  gable. 


THE    ARCHAIC    l'KRlOl) 


IOJ 


Athena,  it  was  at  once  felt  that  the  west  gable  demanded  a  similar 
re.  This  was  accordingly  supplied  by  Cockerell  in  a  restora- 
tion which  he  published  in  1S19,1  and  this  restoration  with 
eleven  figures  became  the  current  representation  in  casts  and 
cuts. 

Bat  .1  study  of  the  numerous  fragments  revealed  the  fact  that 
there  were  Other  figures  bending  forward  ;  and  to  complete  the 
symmetry  of  the  group,  the  fallen  warrior  was  placed  directly  in 
front  of  the  goddess,  so  that  they  two  formed  a  centrepiece,  while 
to  the  right  and  left  was  a  youth  bending  forward  to  seize  the 
fallen  warrior,  and  thus  there  was  perfect  responsion,  figure  for 
figure.-  The  next  step  was  the  positing  of  another  spearman  on 
each  side  behind  the  foremost,  making  a  group  of  fourteen  figures 
in  each  gable/1  I-  urther  fragments  of  these  sculptures  were  brought 
to  light  by  excavations  carried  on  by  Furtwangler  in  1901  for  the 
Bavarian  government.  The  study  of  all  existing  statues  and  frag- 
ments led  furtwangler  to  the  conviction  that  there  were  two  fallen 
warriors  in  the  western  pediment,  symmetrically  arranged  between 
pairs  of  (  ombatants  on  each  side  of  the  figure  of  Athena.  Between 
these  groups  and  each  corner  are  an  archer,  a  spearman,  and  a  fallen 
warrior  1  big.  53 ).    The  western  pediment  then  contains  thirteen  fig- 


:  ■       femple  at  Aegina,     (Munich,  Glyptotbek.) 


1  In  the  Journal  of  Scienci  int./  thr  Arts,  vi,  pi,  T.     For  a  well  illustrated 
int  of  the   various  restorations  proposed  by  Cockerell  and  othei 
Furtwangler,  ■■/  der  Aphaia,  180  ff. 

-   \    l  \nnalx  deir  In  •    15     1         .  I 

1  Konrad   Lao  n         Itsehafi  det   /.' 

.  1  ff. 


108  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

ures,  twelve  besides  Athena.  In  the  eastern  pediment  the  style 
is  somewhat  more  advanced  and  the  figures  were  probably  less 
closely  grouped  than  in  the  western  pediment.  Athena  stands  in 
the  centre  here  also,  but  her  attitude  is  less  stiff;  at  each  side  is  a 
group  of  three  combatants,  the  middle  one  of  whom  is  falling,  but 
not  fallen  ;  there  follows  a  kneeling  archer,  and  a  fallen  warrior 
lies  in  each  corner.     Thus  there  are  ten  figures  besides  Athena.1 

There  has  never  been  any  serious  doubt  that  these  gable  groups 
represent  Homeric  battles.  Now  since  one  of  the  archers  of  the 
west  gable  wears  a  pointed  cap  and  close-fitting  trousers,  he  must 
be  an  Asiatic.  This  half  of  the  gable,  then,  must  contain  Trojans. 
The  foremost  Trojan  spearman,  who  has  pressed  forward  into  the 
other  half  of  the  gable,  may  be  Hector,  and  the  foremost  of  his 
foes  may  be  Ajax,  of  Aeginetan  lineage.  If  this  supposition  is 
correct,  one  of  the  dying  warriors  would  be  Patroklos.  The  east 
gable  is  supposed  to  present  the  older  invasion  of  Troy,  in  which 
Herakles  took  the  leading  part.  But  as  he  is  represented  as  an 
archer,  although  he  is  one  of  the  finest  of  all  the  figures,  he  is 
relegated  to  a  secondary  place. 

Another  participant  in  this  earlier  invasion  was  Telamon,  the 
father  of  Ajax ;  and  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  he  appeared  in 
as  conspicuous  a  place  as  that  occupied  by  Ajax  in  the  west  gable. 
Thus  the  temple  was  a  monument  to  the  prowess  of  Aegina ;  but 
it  was  not  the  Greek  way  to  represent  the  deeds  of  the  present 
generation.  As  Pindar  in  his  odes  would  not  enlarge  on  the 
prowess  of  an  Aeginetan  who  had  just  won  a  victory  at  Olympia, 
but  would  rather  dwell  on  the  glory  of  the  great  past  of  Aegina, 
so  also  did  the  sculptor. 

The  two  figures  bending  forward  to  aid  the  falling  warriors  in 
the  eastern  gable  are  entirely  nude  and  unarmed  ;  so,  also,  are  the 
wounded  men  in  the  corners  of  the  western  gable.  The  rest  have 
implements  of  attack  and  defence.  The  spearmen  have  shields  and 
helmets.    The  fallen  warriors  have  in  some  cases  shields  and  swords. 

1  See  Furtwiingler,  Aegina,  das  Heiligtum  der  Aphaia,  1906,  and  in  the 
pamphlet  Die  Aegineten,  1 906. 


nil.    ARCHAIC    PERIOD  109 

The  archers,  who.  of  course,  cannot  carry  shields,  have  leathern 
cuirasses.     They  are    the  only  participants    in  the  fray  who  are 

clothed.  That  men  actually  fought  naked,  but  with  shield  and 
helmet,  is  not  to  be  thought  of.  The  Sculptor,  however,  demanded 
a  tree  field  for  his  art.  The  custom  of  that  period  was  to  repre- 
sent the  male  as  an  athlete,  whether  contending  for  the  prize  at 

.  mpia  or  fighting  for  the  fatherland.  Nowhere  before  the  Per- 
sian  Wars.  ,>r  even  for  some  time  after,  was  su<  h  attention  paid  to 
anatomical  detail  as  in  these  Aeginetan  groups.  Anatomy  rather 
than  action  is  here  the  one  object,  "  the  be-all  and  the  end-all  "  of 
the  sculptor's  art. 

It  lias  often  been  said  that  there  is  no  real  action,  that  a  spell 
seems  thrown  over  the  combatants,  as  if  they  must  keep  these 
poses  indefinitely.  The  goddess  in  each  gable  shows  so  little 
action  that  it  was  once  proposed  to  regard  both  of  them  as  images 
of  Athena.  What  a  contrast  there  is  between  them  and  Athena 
in  the  old  gable  group  at  Athens  smiting  down  her  foes!  d'hey 
are  also,  in  contrast  to  her,  slightly  under  life-size.  The  fighting 
men  are  still  smaller.  In  comparison  with  the  giants  in  the 
Athenian  gable  they  are  pygmies. 

In  grouping  also,  these  gables  are  surpassed  by  the  old  Athenian 
gable.  Here  the  small  groups  of  men  an-  arranged  in  mechanical 
symmetry.  The  significance  of  the  dying  men  in  the  corners  is 
dubious.  Who  killed  them?  In  the  Athenian  gable  burly  giants 
rush  from  the  corners  of  the  gables ;  and  everybody  is  engaged  to 
the  utmost  of  his  powers.      It   is  certain  that  the   Aegina   figures 

n-  not  placed  strictly  in  single  file.     The  weathering  is  said  to 

show  also  that  some  of  them  were  in  three-quarter  view.1  There 
must  have  been  variety  of  position.  The  men  Leaning  forward  to 
aid  the  falling  warrior  were  dowelled   close   up  against   the  wall   oi 

the  tympanum,  and  the  fallen  warriors  in  the  western  pediment 
re  probably  more  in  the  foreground  than  the  struggling  spear- 
,o  looks  well  at  Furtwan  rouping  (  Fig.  5 1 1 

will  abandon  the  idea  that  the  ii  ;ures  lo<  Iced  like  manikins. 

lolf  Furtwftngler,  Kata  '<        nerGlyptothtk,va.&DitAtgituttn. 


no 


GREEK    SCULPTURE 


Besides  the  elaborate  work  on  every  inch  of  surface,  every 
accessory  known  to  archaic  sculpture  was  here  brought  into  requi- 
sition. Paint  was  liberally  applied.  The  figures  stood  out  against 
a  blue  tympanum.  Shields  were  blue  on  the  outside  and  reddish 
on  the  inside,  representing  respectively  metal  and  leather.  Of  the 
two  archers  in  a  gable,  one  had  a  red  quiver  and  the  other  a  blue 
one.  The  cuirass  of  Herakles  was  not  only  carefully  wrought  out, 
but  was  painted  in  detail.  The  goddesses  were  painted  in  almost 
exactly  the  same  style  as  the  "Maidens  of  the  Akropolis";  and 


Fig.  54.  —  Central  Group  of  West  Gable  at  Aegina.     (Furtwangler's  Restoration.) 


herein,  especially,  is  seen  the  influence  of  Ionic  art.  In  general  it 
may  be  said  that  what  we  have  of  the  gable  groups  is  the  rough  core 
without  the  adornments.  Little  holes  everywhere  show  insertions. 
The  addition  of  leaden  locks  of  hair  was  a  prevailing  practice. 

It  was  early  remarked  that  the  figures  of  the  east  gable  are 
much  superior  to  those  of  the  west  gable.  This  has  been  accounted 
for  in  two  ways.  The  west  gable  may  have  been  made  first,  and 
was  improved  upon  in  the  cast  gable  by  a  later  and  more  gifted 
sculptor  ;  or  a  master  designer  may  have  wrought  out  his  figures  in 
the  east  gable  and  left  the  work  in  the  west  gable  to  an  assistant. 
There  is  no  case  extant  where  two  gables  are  practically  replicas 
one  ot  the  other,  and  yet  are  so  different  in  their  excellence. 


THE    ARCHAIC    PERIOD  i  i  i 

It  would  be  a  Lire. a  mistake  to  suppose  that  these  gable  groups 
were  made  by  sculptors  who,  after  working  all  their  lives  in  bronze, 
had  been  induced  to  abandon  it  to  make  experiments  in  Parian 
marble.  On  the  contrary,  they  appear  to  have  known  every  trick 
of  the  most  experienced  workers  in  marble.  They  wrought  the 
hair  of  the  head,  both  the  long  wavy  strands  and  the  snail-shell 
curls  at  the  ends,  with  great  finesse.  They  wrought  the  pubes  hair 
in  the  form  of  a  spherical  triangle,  with  utmost  elaboration.  They 
undercut  the  marble  with  absolute  confidence,  especially  in  the 
s  of  the  Athena  of  the  east  gable.  They  made  the  figures 
stand  in  various  attitudes  with  a  minimum  of  dowelling  and  with 
slight  attachment  to  their  plinths.  And  yet  for  the  most  part  the 
figures  lack  pulsating  life. 

The  date  of  the  Aegina  gables  has  long  been  debated.  For 
some  time  it  was  customary  to  assign  them  to  the  sixth  centurv. 
Hut  they  were  gradually  brought  down  until  it  became  the  custom 
to  regard  them  as  a  sort  of  trophy  of  the  battle  of  Salamis. 
This  conclusion  is  certainly  wrong,  unless  we  can  suppose  that 
Aegina,  only  fifteen  miles  distant  from  Athens,  went  on  making 
archaic  sculptures  with  broad  shoulders  and  narrow  hips,  anatomi- 
cal manikins,  while  Athens  was  producing  figures  that  throbbed 
with  life.  Even  if  the  pre-Persian  gigantomachy  gable  was  made 
as  late  as  the  expulsion  of  the  Peisistratidae,  510  B.C.,  it  is  difficult 
■  count  for  such  an  anachronism,  but  it  is  more  probable  that 
that  gable  goes  back  to  Peisistratos  himself.  Could  the  Aegine- 
have  held  to  their  antiquated  types  for  half  a  century  after 
the  Athenian  group  had  been  displayed?  Could  they  have  done 
so  when  the  metopes  of  tin-  Treasury  of  the  Athenians  at  Delphi 
and  the  frieze  of  the  C  ury  of  the  Knidians  were  already  known 
to  tin-  whole  <  w  1  k  world  ?  Probably  the  late  date  assigned  to  the 
ia  gables  would  never  have  been  ai  1  epted  had  we  not  had  the 
wounded  and  dying  Trojan  in  the  left  corner  of  the  east  gable  1  Fig. 
55).    II  have  the  actual  thi         f  death.    The  nervous  grasp 

of  t:  on  with  the-  right  hand,  the  tension  of  the  right  leg 

(mOStl)  1,  but  in  this  (  .  the  relaxed  fingers  ot 


ii2  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

the  left  hand,  and  above  all  the  open  mouth,  and  the  eye  and 
cheek  which  show  the  death  agony,  make  this  one  figure  step  out  of 
its  surroundings  and  seem  like  a  forerunner  to  the  "  Dying  Gaul " 
of  the  second  century  B.C.  Even  veins  are  here  portrayed,  long 
before  the  time  of  Pythagoras,  who  is  credited  by  Pliny  l  with  in- 
troducing this  feature  into  sculpture.  The  eyelids  are  as  clearly 
cut  as  they  are  on  statues  at  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century. 

A  recent  French  writer2  claims  that  the  west  gable  was  made  by 
a  sculptor  deeply  imbued  with  Ionic  traditions,  who  produced  anti- 
quated   figures  and  faces,  while  the  eastern   or  main  gable  was 


FIG.  55. —  Dying  Trojan  from  Aegina.      (Munich,  Glyptothek.) 

intrusted  to  a  representative  of  the  new  generation  which  had 
broken  with  old  traditions.  The  difference  is  evident  to  any 
careful  observer,  but  it  is  not  so  great  as  to  lead  to  the  conviction 
that  two  opposite  tendencies  here  clashed.  But  for  the  dying 
Trojan  the  theory  would  lose  most  of  its  plausibility.  While  the 
figures  of  the  east  gable  are  all  better  than  the  corresponding 
figures  of  the  west  gable,  there  is,  with  the  exception  of  the  dying 
Trojan,  no  other  that  suggests  contrast  so  much  as  simple  im- 
provement. All  the  excellences  of  this  one  figure  are  not  enough 
to  upset  the  obvious  judgement  that  the  Delphic  sculptures  cannot 
be  earlier  than  the  Aeginetan,  and  that  the  latter  can  hardly  be 

1  Pliny,  34.  59.  '2  Joubin,  La  sculpture  grecque,  215. 


THE    ARCHAIC    I'KRIOI*  113 

later  than  500  v..c.      We  know  too  little  of  the  history  of  Aegina 
to  find  an  occasion  for  the  erection  of  this  temple,  which,  after 

:ng  under  two  other  names,  seems  now  to  have  been  fixed  as 
a  temple  of  Aphaia  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  Athena  appears 
as  the  central  figure  in  both  gables. 

In  treating  of  the  schools  of  Argos  and  Sikyon  we  had 
great  names  and  sought  to  find  works  to  attach  to  them.  Here 
we  have  tangible  works,  and  have  to  guess  the  makers.  And  this 
is  not  easy,  because  practically  all  the  great  names  of  Aeginetan 
sculptors  are  those  of  workers  in  bronze.  Kallon,  the  first  of 
Aeginetan  sculptors,  wa^  called  a  pupil  of  Tektaios  and  Angelion, 
who  were  pupils  of  Dipoinos  and  Skyllis.  Thus  he  was  at  most 
only  two  generations  removed  from  the  origins,  i.g.  from  the 
A  polios  of  Tenea  and  Thera.  The  greatest  name  of  the  Aeginetan 
school,  however,  was  Onatas,  who  was  a  very  prolific  sculptor  and 
received  commissions  not  only  from  all  parts  of  the  Pelopon- 
nesos,  but  from  Syracuse,  Magna  Graecia,  Asia  Minor,  and  the 
islands.  The  Thasians  set  up  at  Olympia  his  colossal  bronze 
Herakles,  fifteen  feet  high  ;  and  a  colossal  Apollo  at  Pergamon 
brought  him  great  renown.  Perhaps  his  most  famous  statue 
was  his  bronze  black  Demeter  at  Phigaleia,  made  to  replace  an 
older  image,  a  task  in  which  he  is  said  to  have  been  guided  by  a 
dream.  But  what  interests  us  still  more  is  that  he  made  groups 
of  statues.  One  at  Olympia  presented  nine  Creek  heroes  standing 
on   a  curved  base,  while  before  them  on  a  separate  base  stood 

tor,  holding  a  helmet  which  contained  the  lots  by  which  the 
champion  to  fight  Hector  should  be  selected.  Another  group  of 
his  at  Delphi  presented  the  victory  of  the  Tarentines  over  the 

barbarian    Iapy-ians,  and   the  fall  of  their  kin-   Opis.       He   made 

for  Hiero  of  Syracuse  a  chariot  and  charioteer  to  commemorate 
his  victory  in  the  chariot-race  at  Olympia  in  468  h.c.    Thus  it  is 

known  that  Onatas  was  a  maker  of  groups,  and  that  he  was  a. live 

at  a  time  when  the  Aeginetan  -able  -roups  were  supposed  to  have 
•1  made.     It  was  on<  e  thought  not  unreason  ible  to  try  to  <  "li- 
ne- t  oil  name  with  them  ;  and  since  there  was  a  marked  different  6 


H4 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


between  the  two  gables,  it  was  natural  to  surmise  that  Kallon,  the 
older  artist,  made  the  poorer,  or  at  least  more  archaic,  group, 
while  Onatas  made  the  finer,  east  gable,  group.  But  it  is  evident 
that  this  is  largely  guesswork.  Kallon  would  probably  have  been 
too  old  to  share  any  work  of  Onatas.  The  new  discovery  of 
inscriptions  containing  their  names  on  the  Athenian  Akropolis 
would  not  make  them  contemporaries,  but  only  show  that  they 
were  both  active  there  before  the  Persian  campaign  of  479  b.c. 

It  is  unlikely  that  either  of 
them  would  turn  aside  from 
bronze  monuments  to  do 
decorative  work  on  these 
gables. 

There  were  other  sculp- 
tors who  shed  lustre  on 
Aegina,  the  foremost  of 
whom  was  Glaukias,  who 
made  a  bronze  chariot  for 
Gelon  on  the  occasion  of 
his  victory  at  Olympia  in 
488  B.C.,  before  he  became 
tyrant  of  Syracuse,  and  who 
was  much  sought  for  in 
various  parts  of  the  Greek 
world.  We  find  no  hint 
that  any  of  these  artists 
worked  in  any  other  mate- 
rial than  bronze. 

This  bronze  school  has 
probably  left  some  trace  of  itself  in  its  favourite  material.  The 
head  found  at  Athens  on  the  Akropolis  (Fig.  56)  seems  to  show 
in  every  detail  the  very  kind  of  excellence  that  we  should  expect 
of  that  school.  The  delicate  execution  of  the  beard  and  mustache, 
where  every  hair  is  brought  out  by  the  finest  of  lines,  the  locks 
over  the  forehead  coming  out  from  under  the  helmet  now  lost, 


FlG.  56.  —  Bronze  Head.     (Athens,  Akropolis 
Museum.) 


rill".   ARCHAIC    PERIOD 


"5 


the  lij)s,  the  lower  one  bearing  a  deep  depression,  the  thick  eyelids 
and  the  plastic  eyebrows,  while  they  are  incomparably  superior  to 
anything  in  the  gable  groups,  nevertheless  show  ;i  kinship  to  them. 
We  feel  the  character  of  this  man.  When  the  eye  sockets  still 
held  the  white  substance  with  which  they  arc  now  partially  filled, 
and  the  inserted  crystal,  the  face  must  have  been  exceedingly  lite- 
like  and  very  noble.  The  pro- 
file also  is  extremely  delicate. 
There  is  no  Attic  head  that 
closely  resembles  it.  This  may 
he  Onatas*  own  work.  At  any 
rate,  it  is  not  unworthy  of  the 
•.  sculptor  of  the  time. 
And  he  may  have  felt  a  pride  in 
setting  up  at  Athens  one  of  his 
best  works  on  a  base  which  bore 
his  name.  (  me  can  imagine  the 
•ie  to  have  represented  an 
A  -  .'tan  sent  to  Athens  on  a 
delicate  mission. 

There  are  other  works  in 
hronze  that  may  with  some 
plausibility  be  assigned  to  the 
Aeginetan   school.     Such   is   a 

1  from  I  [en  ulaneum   |  I 
57 ),  torn  probably  from  a  full- 
length  statue  when  it  was  taken 
from  ( .  nd  <  irried  to  the 

villa  of  the  Pisos,  where  it  was 
:      .1  in  i;;'-.     The  head  is  beardless,  and  more  youthful  than 
just  d<  1,  hut  it  with  it  in  features,  especially 

in  the  eyebrows  and  the  lips.    The  hair  is  different,  hut  is  arranged 
like  that  of  the  v     ■    •        ible  figure  leaning  forward. 
In  in  t  this  st\:  i    i  fringe  of  bronze  curls 

in  front  of  the  long  braid  Burrounding  the  head,  and  the  smooth 


I  lead  from   I  [ercula- 
ii'-um.     (  Naples  Mus<  urn.  i 


n6 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


hair  of  the  crown,  seems  to  have  been  just  what  the  marble  cutter 
had  before  him  as  a  model,  of  which  he  made  a  faithful  copy. 
The  bronze  youth  is  a  civilian,  and  is  in  some  points  to  be  con- 
trasted with  the  older  man.  The  braids  of  hair  around  his  head 
are  much  like  those  of  the  yellow-haired  Ephebos  of  the  Akropolis, 
in  which  most  authorities  have  seen  Peloponnesian  influence. 
The  face  is  strong.     Studniczka  once  proposed  to  regard  the  head 

as  a  copy  of  Onatas'  Apollo 
at  Pergamon.1 

It  has  also  been  pro- 
posed to  make  the  much- 
discussed  Tux  bronze  statu- 
ette at  Tubingen  a  product 
of  Aeginetan  art.2  It  is 
worthy  of  that  high  honour, 
having  marvellous  energy. 
But  its  claim  is  not  so  clear 
as  that  of  the  two  already 
mentioned.  Mere  excel- 
lence is  not  a  credential 
of  Aeginetan  origin. 

Much  clearer  is  the  case 
of  the  Strangford  Apollo,3 
as  also  that  of  the  small 
Apollo  from  the  Ptoion. 
The  latter  with  its  Aeginetan  mouth  helps  to  bind  the  former  more 
firmly  into  the  group  to  which  it  might  even  without  that  link  be 
assigned  on  the  strength  of  its  coiffure. 

A  bronze  statue  of  about  the  size  of  the  Aegina  statues,  found  in 
1898  in  the  sea  near  ancient  Kreusis,  on  the  north  shore  of  the 
Corinthian  Gulf,  has  some  characteristics  that  would  lead  us  to 
assign  it  to  the  Aeginetan  art.  The  hair,  both  of  head  and  pubes, 
the  latter  in  the  form  of  a  spherical  triangle,  like  coarsely  woven 

1  Horn.  Mitt.  2  (1887),  105,  Note  47.  2  Collignon,  i.  306. 

8  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  51;   Von  Mach,  16. 


Fig.  58. — Archaic  Bronze  Head  of  Zeus  Irom 
Olympia. 


THE    FIFTH    CENTURY  117 

cloth,  accords  with  that  supposition.  The  bronze  of  the  figure  is 
so  thin  that  some  parts  of  it  were  badly  worn  away.  But  skilful 
restoration  has  left  nothing  but  the  arms  missing.  On  the  base  is 
the  inscription  dedicating  it  to  Poseidon.1 

It  would  hardly  be  temerity  to  assign  a  head  of  Zeus '  (  Fig.  58) 
found  at  Olympia  to  the  Aeginetan  workshop  which  contributed 
so  much  to  Olympia.  Here  also  we  have  the  double  row  of  snail- 
shell  locks  over  the  forehead.  Three  tresses  fall  over  each 
shoulder.  The  mass  of  back  hair  is  kept  from  spreading  by  a 
horizontal  band,  after  which  it  is  done  up  in  the  form  of 
krobylos. 

CHAPTER   III 

THE    FIFTH    CENTURY 
Period  of  Transition,  4S0-450  b.c. 

The  somewhat  common  designation  here  adopted  refers  to  a 
period  which  is  a  sort  of  bridge  from  the  intense  activity  in  sculp- 
ture before  the  Persian   War  to  the  great  age  of  Perikles, 

The  rule  of  the  Peisistratidae  had  been  beneficial  to  the  stability 
and  growth  of  Athens.  It  was  on  account  of  a  private  grudge 
that  Aristogeiton  and  tiarmodios,  a  man  and  a  youth,  assassinated 
Hipparchos  in  514  i:.c.  No  popular  movement  was  behind  the 
act.  lint  when  Hippias  had  the  two  friends  put  to  death,  a  senti- 
ment against  the  tyranny  grew  ;  ami  four  years  later  it  was  over- 
thrown by  intrigues  of  the  oligan  hy.  At  the  end  of  another  four 
tin-  demon  racy  was  established  under  Kleisthenes.     Then  it 

m  506   B.C.,  in  all  probability,  that  the  bronze  statues  of  the 

popular  heroe-,,  made  by  Anterior,  were  set  up.     but  this  group 
-•(I  away  to  Susa  by  Xerxi  -.  after  being  held  in  reverence 

for  a  whole  generation,  while  the  heroes  were  made  a  theme  for 
song  and  story. 

1   I- plum.     /;/;.    I  S.jO.   57,    Pk     '-,,  6, 

1  Ptutwingter,  />!<•  Bromtn  von  <>/\w/>i,i,  PI.  I. 


n 8  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

When  the  city  rose  again  from  its  ruins,  these  statues,  which 
were  invested  with  a  sort  of  sacred  character,  were  sorely  missed, 
and  two  sculptors,  Kritios  and  Nesiotes,  the  former  famous,  and 
the  latter  little  known,  were  commissioned  to  replace  them.  In 
477  B.C.  the  new  group  was  completed  and  set  up  in  a  place  called 
"  the  orchestra."  But  many  years  later  Alexander  the  Great, 
or  one  of  the  Seleucid  kings,  brought  back  to  Athens  the  original 
group  of  Antenor ;  and  the  two  groups  had  stood  side  by  side  for 
about  five  hundred  years  when  Pausanias  saw  them. 

Both  these  groups  in  bronze  long  ago  disappeared.  But  in  the 
Naples  Museum  is  a  copy  of  one  or  the  other  in  marble,  which,  in 
spite  of  mutilation  and  subsequent  restoration,  gives  an  excellent 
idea  of  the  original.  This  is  supplemented  by  parts  of  inferior 
copies,  by  coins,  by  a  relief  on  the  arm  of  a  marble  chair  in  Broom 
Hall  in  Fifeshire,  and  by  a  fragment  of  a  vase  in  the  Boston  Mu- 
seum.1 Thus  we  have  the  means  of  securing  a  fair  idea  of  the 
famous  group.  But  until  a  few  years  ago  it  was  regarded  as  very 
doubtful  which  of  the  original  groups  was  represented  by  the 
copies.  Some  indeed  supposed  that  the  second  group  was  a  mere 
reproduction  of  the  other. 

Botho  Graef,2  however,  by  a  thorough  study  of  the  female  statue 
in  the  Akropolis  Museum  which  bears  the  name  of  Antenor,  has 
made  it  clear  that  that  statue  was  so  unlike  the  Naples  copy  of 
Harmodios  in  the  structure  of  the  head  and  in  the  style  of  the  hair 
that  the  latter  could  not  be  regarded  as  reproducing  a  work  of 
Antenor.  This  may  be  accepted  as  the  prevailing  view.  It  seems 
strange  now  that  it  was  ever  doubted.  In  the  thirty  years  which 
separated  the  two  groups  there  was  tremendous  progress  in  sculp- 
ture. Athens  had  got  all  that  it  wanted  in  the  way  of  instruction 
from  Ionia,  and  had  declared  independence.  We  may  never  know 
exactly  how  the  older  group  of  Antenor  looked  ;  but  the  relation 
between  the  groups  was  almost  certainly  one  of  contrast.  Kritios 
is  not  likely  to  have  archaized.     Currents  were  at  that  time  too 

1  Also  by  the  Panathenaic  amphora  on  the  Skaramanga  vase  in  Vienna. 

2  Ath.  Mitt.  15  (1S90),  1. 


THE    111  Ml    CEN  II  RV 


119 


strong  for  .1  -  ulptor  to  stand  still.     Neither  is  it  probable  that  An- 
terior, who   made   the  Female  figure  which  is  a  typical  example 

of  the  Akropolis  "  Maidens,"  and  who  Mill  stood  chin  deep  in 
the  Ionic  flood,  would  or  could   have   made  figures   like   these. 

It  is  the  group  of  Kritios  and 
■to  that  the  Naples  group 
presents  (I  We  have 

a  human  head  of  heavy  pro 
portions,  especially  in  the  chin, 
and  not  a  mere  block,  which 
the  female  head  of  the  Antcnor 
statue  might,  without  great  in- 
justice, he  called.  We  find  an 
■  into  the  skull  instead 
of  renting  on  the  smi  fai  e, 
ears  instead  of  mere  flaps. 
But  the  Naples  figures  have 
been  restored,  and  there  has 
been  considerable  question  as 
to  the  attitude  of  the  figures. 
They  have  been  variouslj 
constructed  in  different  <  asts. 
1  [armodios  has  two  new  arms, 
a  new  right  leg  almost  entire, 

anil   a   new   left    leg    from    the 

knee  downward.    Aristogeiton 

has  fared  even  W<  >rse,  in  having 

•f  Lysippean  style  put  in  the  place  of  one  probably  some- 
thing like  that  of  Harmodios,  hut  representing  an  older  man. 
this,  he  was  damaged  by  having  his  left  arm  with  drapery 
from  it  knocked  off  and  put  on  again  at    a   different 
angle,  giving  a  downward  slant.     On  the  fragment  of  a  vase  in 
B  '        m !  both  men  are  making  a  fierce  onset  against 

1  Boston  .'•.'  •   A'"'"-    u'- 


•  59- 


im.) 


120  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

the  tyrant,  who  was  probably  not  represented.  Harmodios,  the 
youth,  smarting  under  the  affront  to  his  family,  is  in  front,  rush- 
ing forward  with  his  sword  thrown  far  back  to  strike  ;  Aristogei- 
ton,  bearded,  is  more  in  a  position  of  guard,  ready  to  make  a 
thrust  from  behind  his  himation,  which  hangs  from  his  uplifted 
left  arm.1  It  is  probable  that  the  two  actually  charged  side  by 
side.  But  the  painter  could  not  easily  represent  it  so.  The 
clumsy  restoration  did  great  injustice  to  the  young  Harmodios, 
who  is  here  presented  in  the  attitude  of  guard,  while  he  was 
really  straining  himself  to  the  utmost  to  deliver  his  slashing  blow. 

The  style  of  the  Harmodios  head  is  a  proof  that  the  copyist  was 
conscientious.  The  long  heavy  chin,  the  low  forehead,  and  the 
cranium  covered  with  snail-shell  locks  show  this.  In  both  bodies 
we  have  typical  athletes  of  the  time.2 

Lucian  says  of  Hegias,  Kritios,  and  Nesiotes  that  their  works  are 
"  concise,  sinewy,  hard,  and  exact,  and  strained  in  their  lines." 3 
In  this  remark  he  not  only  shows  his  superiority  to  soi-disant 
critics  like  Pliny,  but  seems  to  have  made  his  observations  in  the 
presence  of  the  Tyrannicide  group  itself.  Here  is  no  superfluous 
flesh,  but  abundant  straining.  These  figures  of  heroic  mould  seem 
able  to  brush  away  the  whole  line  of  Aeginetan  warriors,  pygmies 
by  nature,  from  their  shelf.  But  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that 
all  the  figures  of  Kritios  and  Nesiotes  were  in  strenuous  action. 
The  Somz£e  athlete  4  might  be  regarded  as  of  the  same  school,  but 
is  an  example  of  quiet  and  reserve.     The  left  leg  is  gently  bent. 

1  A  vase  of  Duris  (Hartwig,  Aleisterschalen,  PI.  21)  shows  an  Athenian 
warrior  much  like  Aristogeiton,  but  charging  more  fiercely. 

-  J.  Lange  in  his  Darstellung  des  Menschen  in  der  Alt-Griechischen  Kunst 
(p.  xi)  applied  his  "  law  of  frontality,"  taking  the  young  Athlete  on  the  Akrop- 
olis  as  an  example.  This  law  followed  the  rule  "  that  an  imaginary  line 
passing  through  the  skull,  nose,  backbone  and  navel,  dividing  the  body  into 
two  symmetrical  halves  is  invariably  straight,  never  bending  to  either  side." 
The  Tyrannicides  have  broken  the  shackles. 

3  Rhetor,  praecep.,  9,  direa(piyp.ii>a  /ecu  vevpwdt]  nal  cnckrfpa  /col  aKpifiios 
diroTeTafjL^va  reus  ypap./j.a.'is. 

4  P'urtwangler.  Sammlung  Somzee,  Pis.  3-5. 


THi:    I'll' I II    CEN  11  KV 


i  j  i 


The  last  touch  of  archaic  stiffness  is  eliminated,  ami  yet  it  is  still  to 
be  classified  as  archaic  by  its  archaic  gra<  e,  such  as  Lucian  ascribes 

to  Kalamis.  The  attitude  is  very  much  like 
that  of  Pelops  iu  the  east  gable  at  Olympia. 
Iu  fa 1 1.  as  we  proceed  from  this  point  we 
find  occasional  suggestions  of  the  gable  figures 
of  Olympia. 

The  Tyrannicide    group    is    preserved    /• 
to  us  only  in  a  copy  ;   but 
in      the      excavations       at 
Delphi     a    bronze     chari- 
oteer1  (Fig.  60)   was   dis- 
covered,  a  work   of  about 
the    same    date    as  the    group  of  KritioN. 
The     charioteer     was     probably     in     the 
chariot    along    with    his    master,    holdin 
the   reins   of  the  four  horses,*  while   two 
boys  were  on  either  side.    The  whole  rested 
on  a  stone  base,  on  which  is  cut  a  metrical 
inscription  in  two  lines,  only  the  ends  of 
which  are  preserved.     The  end  of  the  first 
line,    IloAiu.Aos    //'    &vi6rjK€v,    gives    us    an 
approximate  date;1     Gelon  died  in  478  1  .(  .. 
the  very  year  of  his  victory  in  a  chariot- 
r  1-  '■    at    I  Delphi.       I  lis    brother,    Poly- 
zalos,  as  the  next  oldest  member  of 
the  family,  made  the  dedication,  prob- 
ably not   later  than  the  following  year. 
I  .  19  we  <an  date  the  charioteer  with 
reasonable  certainty  at  477  b.c,  the 


In. 


I      I    .lM.il.    .    I 

itai.) 


1  Published  by  Homolle  in  leveral  journal*,  but  best  in  tin-  Monmmtnti 

■   ..  1   .  r  ,  i  its  .lis,  ovi  ry. 

'.int. 

*  Part  "f  the  in"  ription  is  lost,  and  part  of  it,  ini  luding  the  name  .>f  Poly- 
,  is  write  the  original  inscription,  which  Ins  left,  however,  some 


i22  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

very  year  to  which  we  have  assigned  the  Tyrannicide  group  of 
Kritios.  While  there  is  resemblance  in  the  features,  the  contrast  in 
attitude  is  what  strikes  us  at  first.  Harmodios  is  in  a  life-and-death 
struggle  ;  the  charioteer  is  wrapt  in  his  mantle  as  in  a  sheath.  He 
is  calm,  one  might  almost  say  cold.  One  would  hardly  call  Har- 
modios beautiful,  except  as  manly  vigour  is  an  element  of  beauty. 
But  the  charioteer  is  one  of  the  most  beautiful  statues  of  antiquity. 
Had  the  head  been  lacking,  there  would  still  have  been  much  to 
admire.  It  is  true  that  the  sheath  in  which  the  figure  is  enclosed 
from  the  waist  downwards  gives  only  the  slightest  suggestion  of  a 
human  form  beneath  it.  But  the  feet  and  the  right  arm  (the  left  is 
lost)  are  beautifully  moulded.  The  single  garment,  a  long  woollen 
chiton  with  short  sleeves,  covers  also  the  upper  part  of  the  body, 
but  in  a  graceful  way.  A  cord  passing  under  the  armpits  and  over 
the  shoulders,  crossing  behind  and  attached  to  the  girdle,  had  the 
function  of  preventing  the  garment  from  catching  too  much  wind. 
At  the  same  time  a  series  of  simple  and  effective,  because  natural, 
folds  is  produced  over  the  breast.  The  form  of  the  body  is  felt 
and  partly  seen  under  the  drapery.  But  there  is  no  sweep  of  the 
garment  in  the  breeze,  as  on  the  charioteer  frieze  of  the  Mausoleum, 
because  here  the  figure  stood  with  his  master  in  the  chariot  at 
parade  rest  after  the  race  was  run.  Of  course  the  spirit  of  the 
age  also  was  different. 

But  it  is  the  head,  after  all,  that  interests  us  most.  It  has  a 
cold,  impassive  calm.  It  has  the  heavy  chin  of  Harmodios,  but 
a  high  oranium  utterly  different  from  his.     The  flat  locks  which 

traces.  From  these  traces,  O.  M.Washburn,  A.  J.  A.  10  (1906),  151-153, 
makes  out  the  name  Arkesilas.  He  believes  that  the  group  was  originally 
dedicated  by  Arkesilas  II,  of  Kyrene,  in  which  case  the  artist  was  a  certain 
Amphion  of  Crete  (cp.  Paus.  10,  15,  6).  F.  v.  Duhn,  Ath.  Mitt.  31  (1906), 
421-429,  regards  Anaxilas  of  Rhegion  as  the  original  dedicator  and  Pythag- 
oras of  Rhegion  as  the  probable  artist.  A.  D.  Keramopoullos,  Ath.  Mitt. 
34  (1909),  33-60,  thinks  Gelon  dedicated  the  group  himself  and  his  name 
was  erased  by  Polyzalos.  If  that  is  correct,  the  group  must  have  been  dedi- 
cated in  478  B.C.  Keramopoullos  suggests  Glaukias  of  Aegina  as  the  possible 
artist. 


THE    FIFTH    CEN  11  KY  123 

cover  it  are  very  different  from  Harmodios'  snail-shell  locks,  and 
remind  one  of  Myron.  They  arc  bound  by  a  diadem  with  a 
meander  pattern  representing  a  diadem  of  metal,  probably  gold, 
from  under  which  curling  locks  stray  over  the  temples  and  bark 
of  the  ears,  while  in  front  of  the  ears  a  streak  of  the  down  of  youth 
falls  over  the  cheeks  very  much  as  on  a  youth  by  the  vase-painter 
Euphronios.1  The  eyes,  fringed  with  metallic  lashes,  do  not  speak 
of  the  heat  o\  the  race  nor  of  the  satisfaction  of  triumph.  The  eye- 
balls are  set  in  enamel.  The  eyelashes  arc  inserted  in  thick  lids. 
The  half-opened  lips  add  to  the  expression.  bine  as  this  chariot- 
eer is,  we  must  remember  that  he  was  simply  a  chariotei 
youth  doing  his  work  for  his  master. 

The  impassive  (mc  of  Harmodios  is  a  usual  case  of  the  lack  of 
play  of  features  to  correspond  with  the  heated  action  of  the 
Even  twenty  years  later  the  figures  at  (  Mympia  show  for 
the  most  part  no  excitement,  even  in  the  fierce  battle  with  the 
itaurs.  Thus  the  charioteer  is  in  keeping  with  his  age. 
Whether  he  should  be  assigned  to  the  Attic  workshop,  as  Joubin1 
proposes,  it  is  not  possible  to  affirm.  It  may  be  put  down  as  not 
improbable. 

Olympia. — The  excavation  of  Olympia,  [877-1881,  threw  great 
light  on  the  development  of  sculpture.  The  results  were  not 
ecli]  en  by  the  subsequent  excavations  at  Athens  and  Delphi. 

In  the  eighteenth  century  Winckelmann  had  emphasized  the  im- 
portance of  <  nng  the  site.      In  the    French    made   trial 
vations,  bringing  to  light  the  Cretan  Bull  metope  and  put  of 
another.     It  was,  however,  reserved  for   Ernsl  Curtius  to  secure, 
through  tin-  (  rown  Prim  e  of  Prussia,  afterwards  Emperor  Frederic, 
had  been  his  pupil,  the  funds  for  a  systematic  excavation  of 
the  whole  site.      I  he  work  wis  a  model  for  all  su<  (  eeding  excava- 
roup  of  tip        •    •<  haeologists  of  <  Germany  hen-  b< 

their  rs   under  ti  id   direction   of    Curtius   and    \dler. 

publication  of  the  results  reflects  great  honour  on  German 
,'  irship.     Had  the  \-     net  n    sculptures  been  treated  in  like 
Hartwig,  .:.'     t  >  lip.  -  Joubin,  15a. 


1 


124  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

manner  we  should  have  much  more  light  on  the  composition  of 
those  pediment  groups  than  we  now  possess. 

While  not  so  many  masterpieces  of  sculpture  were  found  as 
was  anticipated,  the  Hermes  of  Praxiteles  alone,  found  during  the 
first  campaign,  would,  if  put  up  at  auction  among  the  museums  of 
the  world,  go  far  towards  paying  the  expenses  of  the  enormous 
labour.  All  the  sculpture  in  marble  or  other  stone  was  described  by 
Georg  Treu.1  The  large  volume  of  text  accompanying  the  superb 
plates  is  a  monument  to  German  insight,  as  well  as  patience. 
The  bronzes  were  treated  with  the  same  thoroughness  by  Furt- 
wangler.2  These  works  are  intended  to  be  definitive;  after  long 
waiting  and  weighing  of  mint,  anise,  and  cummin,  as  well  as 
weightier  matters,  the  workers  have  said  their  last  word. 

The  sculptures  adorning  the  great  temple  of  Olympian  Zeus  fall 
in  the  period  now  under  discussion.  The  date  of  the  temple  is 
fortunately  fixed.  Made  with  funds  resulting  from  the  sack  in  468 
B.C.  of  Pisa,  a  city  near  at  hand,  which  had  become  prosperous 
from  managing  for  a  long  period  the  affairs  of  the  sacred  place,  it 
was  completed  in  457  B.C.,  the  year  in  which  Sparta  defeated 
Athens  and  Argos  at  Tanagra,  and  put  the  seal  on  her  predomi- 
nance at  Olympia,  which  had  really  begun  with  the  destruction  of 
Pisa  and  the  elevation  of  Elis  to  the  nominal  guardianship  of  the 
temple.  In  that  eventful  year  the  Spartans  set  up  on  the  akro- 
terion  over  the  east  gable  a  golden  shield  with  an  inscription  on 
it,  boasting  of  their  victory.3  The  next  year,  456  B.C.,  was  the  year 
for  celebrating  the  81st  Olympiad.  How  the  humbled  Athenians 
and  Argives  must  have  enjoyed  that  festival  ! 

The  temple,  by  far  the   largest    in    Greece,    already    bore   its 

1  Olympia  III,  Bildwerke  in  Stein  und  Thon. 

2  Olympia  IV,  Die  Br  omen  voji  Olympia.  These  works  supersede  not 
only#the  five  provisional  annual  publications  under  the  title  Olympia,  but 
also  the  numerous  articles  in  various  periodicals,  which  are  interesting  mainly 
as  showing  how  the  truth  was  threshed  out  and  sifted. 

8  A  part  of  this  inscription,  which  was  copied  by  Pausanias,  was  discovered. 
Arch.  Zeit.  40  (1882),  179.     Cp.  Olympia  V,  No.  253. 


mi:    I'll  I  II    CEN  I  l  K\ 


"5 


r 


3  /.^ 


r  i»j 


c 


"'^ 


?: 


128  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

of  the  chariots  there  are  on  the  right  a  maiden  supposed  to  be 
an  attendant  of  Sterope,  and  on  the  left  a  youth,  naked  like  the 
boy  in  front  of  Pelops'  horses,  half  kneeling  and  half  squatting 
like  Sterope's  maid.  Lastly,  in  the  corner,  are  two  reclining  male 
figures,  with  heads  raised  to  follow  the  ascending  line  of  the 
cornice.  These  figures  were  called  by  Pausanias  Alpheios,  at  the 
south  end,  and  Kladeos,  at  the  north. 

The  grouping  of  the  figures  is  adapted  to  the  space.  Zeus, 
colossal,  about  eight  feet  high  under  the  apex  of  the  gable, 
dominated  the  group.  Pelops  and  Oinomaos  are,  as  befits  heroes, 
somewhat  over  life-size.  Sterope  and  Hippodameia  are  about 
the  proper  size  for  mortal  women.  Thus  the  descending  line  of 
the  cornice  seemed  a  natural  border  of  the  group  as  it  ran  close 
over  the  heads  of  the  central  group,  then  over  the  bodies  of  the 
horses,  and  finally  over  kneeling  and  reclining  figures  to  the  cor- 
ners.    The  scene  is  quiet,  preparatory  to  action. 

The  west  gable  (Fig.  61)  is  in  this  respect  diametrically  oppo- 
site. We  have  here  a  fierce  fight  between  Lapiths  and  Centaurs,  a 
favourite  theme  in  Greek  art.  In  the  centre  stands  Apollo  (Fig. 
63),  with  his  body  facing  to  the  front.  His  head,  however,  is 
turned  to  his  right,  so  that  his  face  is  in  almost  three  quarters 
view.  He  held  a  bow  in  his  left  hand,  which  is  extended  down- 
ward, and  grandly  stretches  out  his  right  to  quell  the  tumult.  On 
the  right  of  Apollo,  as  we  face  the  gable,  stands  Theseus,  and  to 
the  left  Peirithoos,  the  Lapith  king,  whose  bride  is  being  attacked. 
The  heroes  strike  with  battle-axes  the  monsters  who  hold  the 
struggling  women  in  their  grasp.  On  Peirithoos'  side,  the  left,  is 
the  bride,  Deidameia,  marked  as  such  by  her  richer  garments. 
Theseus  is  next  to  Apollo  the  finest  figure  in  the  gable.1  The  huge 
bulk  of  the  Centaurs  makes  the  contest  seem  unequal  but  for  the 
fact  that  the  god  is  there.     The  heroes  also  are  no  mean  support. 

1  The  fine  head,  after  being  assigned  first  to  Deidameia  and  then  to 
Peirithoos,  has  been  correctly  claimed  for  Theseus.  This  is  perhaps  the 
first  case  of  the  division  of  the  forehead  by  a  horizontal  depression,  which 
is  not  seen  at  all  on  female  heads. 


THK    FIFTH    CENTURY 


1 29 


-Apollo,  Ca  ■  V.      :  1  . 


130  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

The  women,  who  have  beautiful  forms,  tear  with  all  their  might 
the  hair  and  beard  of  the  Centaurs,  at  the  same  time  trying  to 
protect  their  persons  from  the  brutes'  insulting  grasp. 

To  the  right  and  left  of  this  central  group  of  seven  figures1  are 
two  groups  of  two  figures  each,  a  Centaur  and  a  youth,  the  youth 
in  the  left  half  being  a  tender  boy.  Both  struggle  with  all  their 
might,  the  one  in  the  right  half  trying  to  throttle  the  Centaur  with 
his  abnormally  long  arm  which  the  Centaur  is  biting,  causing  him 
to  express  pain.2  Then  follows  a  group  of  three  on  each  side. 
On  the  left  a  Centaur  is  pulling  down  by  the  hair  a  kneeling 
woman,  at  the  same  time  putting  his  hoof  into  her  lap ;  while  a 
naked  Lapith,  taking  a  grip  with  both  hands,  pulls  his  head  down 
toward  the  corner  of  the  gable.  The  corresponding  group  on  the 
right  represents  a  Centaur  tearing  the  clothing  off  a  woman,  while 
a  youth  farther  down  in  the  gable  thrusts  a  sword  into  the  mon- 
ster's breast.  In  the  extreme  corners  are  two  pairs  of  women 
looking  on,  perhaps  because  it  was  impossible  to  find  room  for 
a  Centaur  group  here.  The  foremost  one  of  each  pair  shows  a 
lively  interest  in  the  scene.3  They  rest  on  slanting  blocks  which 
raise  their  heads  up  to  the  ascending  line  of  the  gable.  The  very 
last  ones  need  no  such  raising. 

1  It  appears  reasonable  to  regard  the  god  and  the  two  heroes  facing 
outward  from  him  as  a  group.  This  would  leave  for  the  other  figures  the 
following  numerical  grouping  from  left  to  right;  232232232.  But  if 
we  consider  the  god,  as  we  perhaps  ought,  as  a  figure  by  himself,  we  should 
have  the  responsion  2323I3232. 

2  The  only  such  case  in  the  sculptures  of  the  temple. 

3  At  some  unknown  date  these  two  pair  suffered  practical  annihilation. 
The  whole  western  gable  group  was  doubtless,  like  the  eastern,  originally  of 
Parian  marble;  but  now  the  two  reclining  figures  at  the  left  end  (north)  are  of 
Pentelic.  So,  also,  is  the  foremost  of  the  pair  in  the  right  corner,  although 
the  slanting  block  on  which  she  reclines  is  Parian.  The  figure  behind  her  is 
Parian  with  the  exception  of  the  outstretched  right  arm.  The  original  figures 
were  probably  destroyed  or  damaged  at  an  early  date  by  an  earthquake. 
The  restored  figures  are  in  entire  keeping  with  the  rest  except  that  the 
figure  to  the  extreme  left  has  the  upper  eyelid  projecting  over  the  lower  at 
the  outer  corner,  a  trait  not  seen  elsewhere  in  the  gables. 


THE    I  II  I  II    (1  \  II  RY 


i  $1 


As  in  the  east  gable  so  here  the  figures  arc  adapted  to  the  S| 
to  be  filled.     Apollo,  the  ^h\,  in   the  centre   i*   taller   than  the 
heroes  on  his  right  and  left.     Then  follow  erect  Centaur*,  women, 
Centaurs  kneeling,  Centaurs  dragged    down  to  pound,  and 

finally  reclining  women  a*  spe<  tators  of  the  fight.      The  limita- 
tions of  spate  are   regarded   from   the  centre   to   the  comers. 

The  east  gable  is  somewhat  open,  or  at  least  less  <  rowded  than 
the  west  gable.  The  former  has  but  thirteen  human  figures.  It 
has,  it  is  true,  two  quadrigas  each  of  which  might  be  regarded 
as  the  equivalent  of  three  human  figures.  But  the  huge  Centaurs 
and  the  Lapiths  in  strained  action  are  a  partial  equivalent  for  the 
quadrigas.  Twenty-one  such  figures  as  the  west  gable  holds  did 
not  let  much  of  the  background  show. 

Both  group*  are,  in  the  main,  treated  in  relief  style,  for  front 
view  only.  The  backs  are  everywhere  slighted,  somewhat  more 
in  the  west  gable  than  in  the  other.  The  woman  in  the  last  Cen- 
taur group  to  the  right  ha*  no  body  at  all  below  her  breast,  only 
a  *kirt  attached  to  the  Centaur.  In  the  quadrigas  of  the 
gable  only  the  outermost  horse  i*  wrought  out  ;  and  the  b.n  k  side 
is  *haved  down  a  good  deal.  The  other  three  were  simply 
a  rough  block  with  three  heads  appearing  in  echelon  in  front 
of  the  outermost  horse.  Such  neglect,  somewhat  unusual  both 
earlier  and  later,  is  singular.  What  a  contrast  to  the  principles 
of  the  Aegina  groups  ! 

The  Olympia  gables  were  in  *omr  cases  roughly  finished  even 

in  parts  that  were  visible.      Paint  must  have   been   applied   to   the 

d  of  Theseus,  to  that  of  "  Kladeos,"  and  many  others.     - 
from  fifty  or  Bixty  feet  below,  and  from  the  requisite  lateral  distant  e 
of  two  or  three  time*  that  amount  of  space,  ill  tin*  slighting  dis- 
appeared, and  the  effect  was  doubtless  immensel)  sal  ry,  in 

keeping  with  the  architecture  of  s]  n  which  Bl 

heavily  painted  i  i  material  of  which  the  temple 

made.     This  was  no  Parthenon,  where  ev<  rything  was  wrought 
out  in  the  finest  detail 
There  are  in  the  m        ible  three  heads  that  have  a  value  in  the 


1 32  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

history  of  art.  Above  all  is  the  cold  but  noble  head  of  Apollo. 
His  gaze  following  the  direction  of  his  extended  right  arm  prom- 
ises victory.  "  All  that  the  gods  work  is  effortless  and  calm." 
The  contortions  of  the  bestial  Centaurs  are  all  in  vain.  We 
read  their  doom  in  that  strong  and  pitiless  face.  Second  only 
to  the  head  of  Apollo  are  the  mortal  heads  of  Theseus  and  of 
the  suffering  Deidameia.  Next  to  these  in  interest  are  the  heads  of 
the  reclining  figures  in  the  left  corner  of  the  west  gable,  and  next 
to  those  the  head  of  Kladeos  in  the  right  corner  of  the  east  gable. 
The  head  of  the  Lapith  whose  arm  is  being  bitten  by  a  Centaur  has 
a  strong  resemblance  to  the  head  of  Harmodios,  both  in  its  shape 
and  in  the  hair,  although  the  locks  are  not  so  tightly  curled  as 
those  of  Harmodios.  On  the  whole  we  are  fortunate  in  the 
preservation  of  so  many  heads. 

The  question  to  what  school  the  Olympia  gables  belong  has 
been  much  debated  ;  and  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  of  it  quot 
homines  tot  sententiae.  They  have  been  assigned  to  every  known 
school  from  Ionia  to  Sicily.  Some  critics  have  even  assigned  them 
to  a  local  school.  The  Argive  school  was  for  a  long  time  in  favour. 
In  more  recent  times  an  Attic  origin  has  gained  some  sup- 
port.1 Sicilian  origin,  although  proposed  by  Kekul£,2  found  little 
favour.  Sicilians  may  have  had  their  orders  filled  largely  in  the 
mother  country.  The  similarity  observed  between  the  Olympia 
sculptures  and  the  metopes  of  Temple  E  at  Selirius  might  better  be 
accounted  for  by  supposing  the  latter  made  by  sculptors  from 
Greece. 

But  one  may  say,  "  Have  we  not  the  clear  testimony  of  the  vera- 
cious Pausanias  that  Paionios  of  Mende  made  the  east  gable 
figures  and  Alkamenes  the  other?  "  It  took  some  time  to  get 
free  from  this  supposed  binding  statement.  But  how  much  it  has 
now  become  discredited  is  seen  from  the  variety  of  schools  to  which 
authorities  have  assigned  the  gables.  Pausanias,  when  he  visited 
Olympia  at  about  the  middle  of  the  second  century  a.d.,  did  not 
come  to  impart  information  but  to  get  it.  The  ciceroni  of  the  place 
1  Joubin,  243.  2  Arch.  Zeit.  41  (1883),  241. 


THE    FIFTH   CENTURY  133 

were  his  soun  e  of  information.  That  guild  is  very  much  alike  in 
all  places  and  at  all  times.  How  unlikely  it  was  that  they  would  tell 
sanias  that  some  strolling  or  local  sculptors  now  unknown  to 
fame  made  those  gable  figures  I  No,  they  must  light  on  some  name 
of  note.  They  knew  that  Paionios  had  worked  at  <  Hympia  at  some 
time,  because  his  name  was  cut  on  the  base  of  his  famous  Nike 
close  to  the  east  front  of  the  temple.  In  the  inscription  on  th.it 
base  he  mentioned  that  he  had  made  akroteria  for  the  temple.1  It 
is  possible  that  the  ciceroni  of  the  second  century  a.i>.  thought  that 
"  akroterion"  meant  a  gable,  and  so  started  the  error.  This  is,  how- 
ever, uncertain.  But  it  is  certain  that  Paionios,  who  made  his  Nikeas 
late  as  4J4  B.C.,  can  hardly  have  been  more  than  a  youth  in  457  B.<  ., 
when  the  gables  were  already  completed.  It  may  also  be  put  down 
as  certain  that  the  same  sculptor  could  not  have  made  such  different 
sculptures  as  the  Nike  and  the  east  gable  group.  What  probably 
happened  was  this  :  the  ciceroni,  not  being  satisfied  with  an  anony- 
mous sculptor,  and  seeing  the  name  of  l'aionioscut  in  big  letter^  on 
this  base  so  near  to  the  east  front  of  the  temple,  told  the  story  off- 
ban  1  that  he  had  made  the  sculptures  of  the  east  gable.  What 
did  they  know  of  style?  The  case  against  Alkamenea  i^  equally 
clear.  He  w.is  at  work  in  40;  B.C.  when,  after  the  expulsion  of  the 
Thirty  Tyrants,  he  made  two  statues  for  Thrasybulos.  Could  he 
have  been  famous  enough  to  have  th  ition  of  a  gable  of  this 

great  temp!'  ned  to  him  as  far  back  as  4  70  1  ..  .?     The  ( Ireeks 

did  not  usually  have  a  longer  career  than  that  ofSophoklesl    The 

idea    t  >r   some    time    current    that    there    was    another   and    older 

Alkamenes  seemed  strengthened  by  an  ins<  ription  on  a  statue  re 
cently  found  at  Pergamon.1     But  statue  ami  ins<  ription  have  been 

nt  authority  ;  to  go  no  farther  back  than  the 
well-known  A  Ik  amen 

But  what  seems  to  make  it  <  ertam  that  one  or   the  other   of  the 

claimants  must  drop  out  is  the  well-known  fact  that  not  only  are 
both  gables  of  the  tyle(a  result  impossible  in  the  case  of 

1  Pans,  v  ." ■   1  -  /•■•'  1 1904,  ;''. 

8  Winter,  Alk.  Mitt.  SQ.  (1904  III. 


i34  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

two  masters  of  pronounced  style)  but  the  metopes  also.  Finally 
it  is  difficult  to  put  implicit  confidence  in  the  report  of  Pausanias, 
who  took  the  Apollo  of  the  west  gable,  that  commanding  figure, 
to  be  Peirithoos.  Pausanias  is  thus  convicted  of  at  least  a  lack  of 
observation,  perhaps  one  might  say  of  extreme  gullibility.  It  is 
also  not  unlikely  that  having  imbibed  Roman  notions,  he  deceived 
himself  in  naming  the  end  figures  in  the  east  gable  Alpheios  and 
Kladeos.  The  notion  that  rivers  were  represented  in  early  Greek 
art  by  human  figures  has  been  stoutly  combated  by  Walz.1 
Later  Furtwangler2  took  upon  him  the  defence  of  Walz  and  main- 
tained that  in  the  fifth  century  B.C.  the  personification  of  streams 
in  art  was  unknown,  and  that  the  notion  rests  solely  on  this  state- 
ment of  Pausanias. 

Note.  — The  arrangement  in  Fig.  6 1  is  that  of  Treu.  It  is,  of  course, 
possible  that  this  arrangement  is  not  always  correct.  Curtius'  arrangement, 
which  is  followed  in  the  museum  at  Olympia,  is  impressive,  but  it  is  in  many 
cases  demonstrably  wrong.  Treu's  final  adjustment  was  based  upon  infinite  shift- 
ing and  proving.  It  has  given  the  coup  de  grace  to  many  other  proposed 
arrangements.  He  had  two  guiding  principles:  («)  To  bring  to  front  view 
what  was  worked  to  be  shown.  (b)  To  group  the  figures  so  that  all  except 
the  two  inserted  in  front  of  the  horses  should  have  their  heads  close  against 
the  descending  cornice  of  the  gable,  thus  avoiding  the  large  open  spaces  of 
other  arrangements.  Nearly  twenty  years  passed  before  the  definitive  work 
of  Treu  was  given  to  the  public.  In  the  meantime  a  large  body  of  literature 
on  the  gables  had  come  into  being.  So  voluminous  is  it  that  it  is  hardly 
practicable  to  cite  here  all  these  articles.  Treu  overlooked  none  which  had 
been  published  when  he  wrote.  Wernicke  {Jahrbuch,  12  (1897),  !^9)  made 
some  weighty  suggestions  on  the  east  gable  group  which  deserve  special  men- 
tion. He  made  Oinomaos  and  Sterope  change  places  with  Felops  and  Hip- 
podameia.  He  put  an  altar  in  front  and  a  little  to  the  right  of  Zeus  with  the 
two  men  advancing  obliquely  towards  it,  and  the  women  following.  He 
maintained  that  the  dowel  holes  in  the  backs  of  the  figures  show  that  they 

1  Eckjiguren  ant  Ostgiebel  des  Olympischen  Zeus/empels  und  am  Westgiebel 
des  Parthenons ;  a  work  of  great  merit  but  very  inaccessible,  in  Program 
des  Evang.  Theol.  Seminars  ztl  Maulbronn,  1887.  This  was  the  first  attack 
on  a  long-cherished  error. 

2  Masterpieces,  457;  Jahrbuch  6  (1891),  87,  and  in  various  other  passages. 


THE   FIFTH   CENTURY  135 

were  placed  obliquely  to  the  background.     The  i  an  altar  is  an  old  one 

which  had  been  discarded  on  what  Beemed  sufficient  grounds.     The  sui 
tion  has  great  interest  as  bringing  the  principal  persons  into  an  action  ><( 
great  significance  instead  of  letting  them  stand  otiose.     Tl 
to  it  is  that  the  story  makes  Oinomaos  sacrifice  before  the  departure  of  Pelops, 
While  the  exact  spot  where  each  fragment  of  gables  OJ  metop  and 

was  noted,  very  little  light  was  thus  obtained  a^  to  their  exact  placing.  The 
fragments  were  widely  scattered  by  the  earthquake  which  threw  them  down. 
It  is,  however,  worth  noting  that  not  a  single  fragment  belonging  on  one  end 
of  the  temple  was  found  lying  at  the  other  end. 

The  Metopes. —  The  metopes  on  the  outside  of  the  temple  were 
left  without  sculptural  decoration.  The  cella,  however,  had  them 
at  each  end.  At  each  end  of  the  cella  was  a  portico  with  two 
columns,  which  gave  six  metopes.  These  represented  the  twelve 
labours  of  Herakles,  who  was  held  in  especial  honour  at  Olympia. 
The  fragments  of  the  east  porch  were  never  mixed  with  thos 
the  west,  and  thus  it  was  easy  to  assign  them  to  their  places. 
The  order  was  as  follows,  beginning  on  the  south  end  and  pro- 
ceeding to  the  right  :  — 

On  the  West  fr. >tm   North  to  Smith, 
<  )n  the  But,  proceeding  to  the  Ri  ,iC  Ki(.hl 

i.    Erymantbian  Boar.  1.  Vim  an  1  ion. 

fDiomedea.  2.  Lernean  Hydra. 

3.  Geryon.  .  Stymphalian  Bit 

4.  A:'  4.  (  nt.m  BulL 

5.  Kerberos.1  5.  Arcadian  Stag. 

6.  .'■  rlippolyta. 

( )f  the  metopes  the  two  finest  are  the  Atlas   metope  on  the 

■  and  the  Bull  metope  on  the  west,  partly  Put  not  altogether 

they  are  best  preserved.     Fate  has  doubtless  been  kind 

here.    The  next  best  are  the    Vugean  Stables  on  the   east   and 

the  Stymphalian  birds  on  the  west.    The  rest  are,  for  the  most  part, 

aentary  and  no1  impressive  as  works  of  art.      I    e  Atlas  met- 

.  perhaps  without  design,      i       well  with  the  Btationarj  1  har- 

.-.ual  order  "f  subjects  made  1  last,  but  the  Augean  metope 

irk  ./,  which  shows  that  it  was  the  inst  in  the  lit 

what  we  call  the  lait. 


136 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


acter  of  the  east  gable  above  it,  while  the  Bull  metope  agrees 
equally  well  with  the  strenuous  action  and  contorted  lines  of  the 
west  gable.  But  the  parallel  goes  no  farther.  Since,  however, 
they  are  as  near  as  possible  to  the  centre,  one  is  tempted  to  see 
design  here.  But  the  order  is  more  probably  a  lucky  accident. 
There  are  other  metopes  in  which  the  action  is  nearly  as  strenuous 
as  in  the  Cretan  Bull  metope,  e.g.  the  Augean  Stables  metope. 

The  Atlis  metope  (Fig.  64)  deserves  more  than  a  passing  look. 
There  is  delightful  naivete  in  Atlas'  holding  out  the  coveted  apples 

for  Herakles  to  take 
them  when  his  whole 
strength  is  required  to 
support  the  heavens. 
The  woman  who  stands 
behind  Herakles  and 
eases  his  load  with  her 
hand  is  not  one  of  the 
Hesperids,  but  his 
sympathetic  goddess 
Athena,  a  splendid 
draped  figure  well  con- 
trasted with  the  two 
nude  males.  There  are 
indications  that  she  bore 
a  spear.1  It  was  long 
thought  that  the  double 
cushion  which  Herakles 
held  was  all  that  he  visibly  bore  ;  but  it  has  been  ascertained  that 
something  now  missing  rested  upon  the  roughened  upper  surface 
of  the  cushion,  something  that  represented  the  weighty  heavens, 
—  the  sky  that  would  fall  unless  somebody  held  it  up.  Atlas 
will  presently  go  back  to  his  eternal  task  and  Herakles  to  other 
labours. 

The  Cretan  Bull  is  in  the  Louvre,  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
1  A  hole  is  bored  perpendicularly  through  her  closed  right  hand. 


Fig.  64.  — Athena  supporting  Herakles. 
(Olympia.) 


THF.    Firm    CEN  ruRY 


1    I  " 

1 .1 , 


parts  found  in  the  German  excavations.  The  Athena  of  the 
Stymphahan  F.irtU  metope,  sitting  negligent!)  on  a  rock,  is  also  in 
the  Louvre,  from  the  excavations  of  i8:m,  and  is  represented  in 
the  Olympia  Museum  by  a  <  ast. 

The  style  of  the  metopes  is  very  much  like  that  of  the  gables. 
There  is  the  same  slighting,  only  to  a  higher  d<  ,  of  the   hair, 

which  implies  paint  As  on  the  gables,  the  chisel  left  much  to 
the  brush.  The  relief  is  quite  high.  A  striking  example  is  that 
of  Herakles  thrown  out 
in  front  of  the  bull.  The 
sculptors  were  not  bent 
on  finesse,  but  on  effc<  ts, 
and  they  got  them,  as  did 
the  sculptors  of  the  gable 
groups.  Sterope  wears 
the  same  long  woollen 
chiton  with  diploidion 
which  is  seen  on  Athena 
in  the  Atlas  metope  and 
in  the  Augean  Stables 
metope.  The  straight 
folds  remind  one  of  a 
fluted  column. 

With  these  figures  from 
Olympia  there  may  be 
grouped  several  female 
figures,  some  of  which  are 

probably  copies  made  in  Roman  times  ;  .is.  for  example,  the  1  [estia 
( iiustiniani,1  and  a  female  statue  in  <  lopenh  igen.  I  mtemporary 
or  nearly  contemporary  with  the  Olympia  gables  is  Temple  /  .  at 
Selinus,  judged  from  a  single  metope  to  be  a  temple  of  Hera.  This 
ipe  (  Fig.  65  »  is  the  mi  ng  and  expressive  of  tour  that 

1   l'.runii-l'.ru.  kmaiin.   '  .     Von   Mach,  7; 

-  An,  :\   Gtypt  •  ■    l'1'    ";    Joubin«  ''  '■   ' 

has  recently  been  (band  f"r  it. 


'.-.  —  Zeus  and  Hera  on  M  ■  >pl«- 

/•  at  Selinus.    (Palermo  Museum.) 


138  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

are  preserved.  It  represents  Hera  presenting  herself  in  all  her 
overpowering  charms  to  Zeus  on  Mount  Ida.1  The  sculptor  who 
put  this  beautiful  idyllic  scene  from  the  Iliad  into  sculpture  was  a 
master.  Zeus  in  his  eagerness,  as  Hera  unveils  herself,  seizes  her 
by  her  left  wrist,  overpowered  by  her  loveliness.  But  there  is  no 
ignoble  suggestion  in  the  scene.  It  is  noteworthy  that  all  the  fe- 
male figures  in  this  series  have  the  nude  parts  made  of  marble. 
Heads  and  arms  are  inserted  in  the  limestone  body.  The  males 
are  entirely  of  limestone.  The  other  three  metopes  —  Herakles 
overpowering  an  Amazon,  Aktaion  and  Artemis,  Athena  striking 
down  Enkeladas  —  are  much  inferior  to  that  of  Zeus  and  Hera. 
Of  a  somewhat  earlier  date,  but  still  in  the  period  under  discussion, 
are  two  metopes  from  Temple  F,  at  Selinus,  with  the  lower  part 
only  preserved.  Both  represent  a  gigantomachy.  In  one, 
Athena,  marked  by  her  aegis,  is  striking  down  the  giant,  who  opens 
his  mouth  in  the  death  agony.  The  other  goddess  is  not  marked 
with  any  certain  sign.     She  is  perhaps  Artemis. 

At  this  point  we  must  take  cognizance  of  the  fact  that  the 
Olympia  sculptures  stand  on  the  verge  between  the  old  and  the 
new,  and  we  must  now  take  note  of  several  pieces  which  serve  as 
a  transition  to  a  freer  style  of  art. 

We  have  in  Fig.  66,  from  the  Museo  delle  Terme,  a  relief,  found 
in  1887  in  the  grounds  of  the  Villa  Ludovisi,  one  of  the  gentlest  and 
sweetest  representations  of  the  great  goddess  Aphrodite  rising  from 
the  sea,  assisted  on  the  right  and  left  by  two  attendants,  probably 
Horae.  Helbig  finds  in  the  relief  an  accouchement  scene.  In 
that  case  we  cannot  place  it  in  the  first  period  of  transition  from 
the  archaic.  It  can,  however,  hardly  be  doubted  that  it  is  a 
solemn  presentation  of  the  birth  of  Aphrodite.  The  goddess  rises 
from  the  watery  element,  the  seashore  being  indicated  underneath 
the  feet  of  the  attendant  Nymphs.  Her  wet,  clinging  drapery  is 
to  be  covered  by  a  thick,  woollen  robe,  which  is  drawn  up  from  the 
right  and  left.  It  has  already  been  drawn  up  high  enough  to 
accord  with  the  solemnity  of  the  great  occasion.     It  is  proper 

1  II.  14.  152-352. 


THE    FIFTH    I  ENT1  RY 


139 


that,  being  in  relief,  the  goddess  should  have  her  head  in  profile, 
while  the  breast  should  expand.  In  her  gentleness  she  looks  for 
attendants  to  help  her.  We  have  unfortunately  lost  the  head-,  of 
these  beings  ;  but  their  attitude  suggests  in  every  motion  the  wish 
to  assist.  We  can  more  readily  accept  the  loss  of  these  heads, 
since   in   the   central    figure    the   head    is    absolutely    |  \ 

sweeter  Aphrodite  than  this  could  hardly  be  portrayed. 

Had  we  only  this  figure  we  might  put  it  much  later,  perhaps  in 
the  Periklean  age  ;  but  the  accessories  forbid  it.     The  lines  of  the 


K$i*^^^ 

4                1 

ns^ 

/y    1 

1         k  *   J* 

I 

FlC.  66.— Aphrod  \  from  the  Sea.     (Rome,  M  !•■ 


skirts  fall  stiffly  in  parallels.  The  hair  above  the  band  i->  very 
carefully  adjusted,  as  are  the  long  tresses  which  fall  over  the  left 
shoulder.  (  >n  the  whole  the  watery  element  is  miffi<  iently  In* 
;  but  to  make  sun-  that  the  seashore  is  heir  r ,•  have 
pebbles  under  the  feel  of  the  attendant  Nymphs.  A  touch  that 
marks  the  relief  the  awkward  ment  bj  which 

the  six  arms  appear  in  two  maft*t-     The  fed  are  ungainly  and 

awkwardly  pla<  ed. 


140 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


The  relief  has  at  some  time  been  roughly  chipped  off  at  the  top, 
so  that  the  heads  of  the  attendants  are  lost ;  the  ornaments  at  the 
bottom  have  also  been  cut  away  (possibly  to  be  replaced  with 
bronze  ornaments),  though  the  feet  are  almost  intact.     The  whole 

plaque  is  about  five 
feet  long  and  three 
feet  high.  Attached  to 
the  main  relief  are  two 
shorter  arms  or  wings, 
forming  three  sides  of 
what  has  been  called 
a  throne.1  On  each 
of  these  short  arms  a 
woman  is  portrayed. 
Both  rest  on  cushions  ; 
but,  apart  from  that 
fact,  the  two  are  ap- 
parently sculptured  to 
point  a  contrast.  One 
is  a  young  woman  ab- 
solutely nude  and  play- 
ing on.  a  double  flute, 
as  she  leans  back  on 
a  thick  cushion  in  the 
abandon  of  naitre  avec 
le  printemps,  mourir 
avec  la  rose.  She  is  content  to  be  happy  and  to  die.  On 
the  other  arm  is  a  woman  much  older,  draped  from  the  top  of 
her  head  to  the  sandals.     Her  attitude  is  stiff  as  can  be.     She 


Fig.  67.- 


Head  of  Goddess.     (Rome,  Museo 
delle  Ternie.) 


1  In  the  Museum  of  Fine  Arts  in  Boston  is  a  three-sided  relief  (not  yet 
published)  so  similar  in  shape,  size,  and  style  that  it  must  be  considered  in 
connection  with  the  one  discussed  in  the  text.  Were  not  the  front  about  three 
inches  shorter,  the  two  might  almost  be  regarded  as  parts  of  one  monument. 
The  scene  on  the  front  represents  a  winged  figure  weighing  two  nude  "souls" 
in  the  presence  of  two  seated  women;  on  one  end  a  nude  cithara  player  cor- 


TIN      FIFTH    i  I A  II  RY  ,.,, 

throws  incense,  which  she  draws  out  of  a  flat  box.  into  a  cup  on  .1 
high  standard.  She  is  sad  if  not  severe.  It  seems  as  if  the 
sculptor  had  before  him  the  parable  of  the  Wise  and  Foolish 
Virgins,  or  something  like  it.  The  Foolish  Virgin,  if  so  we  may 
call  her,  is  one  of  the  sweetest  creations  of  the  group.  She  may 
not  have  chosen  "the  better  part."  but  her  sweetness  allures. 
Perchance  the  great  Anadyomene  may  take  her  to  belong  to  her 
chosen  circle.  Were  it  not  for  their  association  with  Aphrodite 
we  might  take  the  reliefs  as  picturing  "  summer  and  winter." 
But  bound  up  as  they  are  with  her,  we  are  safer  with  the  interpre- 
tation here  proposed.1  Mr-.  I  gi  trie  Strong*  comes  to  the  con- 
clusion that  this  relief  belongs  to  Kalamis.  This  may  be  right  ; 
but  our  knowledge  of  Kalamis  is  so  slight  that  we  ire  still  groping 
in  the  night.      It  is  natural  to  feel  that  this  is  like  his  work. 

A  colossal  head  in  the  Museo  delle  Terme  (Fig.  67)  belongs  to 
the  same  period  as  these  reliefs,  and  shows  some  similarity  to 
them  in  style,  in  spite  of  its  lack  of  life,  which  may  be  due  in  part 
to  its  size  and  in  part  to  the  fact  that  it  belonged  to  a  cultus 
statue. 

There  are  other  survivals  either  in  originals  or  copies  which 
may  with  considerable  certainty  be  assigned  to  the  period  of  tran- 
sition even  if  we  cannot  give  them  a  more  definite  date.  The  five 
bronze  dan<  ing  women  from  Henul aneuni  in  the  Naples  Museum 
fall  in  this  (  la>s.:I  The  stiff  folds  of  the  1  )oric  chiton  with  diplois 
ally  them  with  figures  in  the  east  gable  and  metopes  of  the  (  Hympi a 

temple.  The  immobile  features  are  entirely  out  of  accord  with 
the  action  in  which  the  women  are  supposed  to  b  d. 

responds  to  the  nude  flute  ^irl  <>f  the  Ludovisi  reli<  fj  and  on  tin-  other  end  is 
a  curiously  r<ali-ti<  old  woman,  ["he  beautifully  cut  -<  1  ■  .ll-  on  the  1  ■•  -t t >  in 
suKK,st  what  i>  misting  frnm  the  1  >< ■  1 1 •  •  1 1 1  "i  the  Ludovisi  n  I 

1  Antike  Denkm8iert  ii.  |  i  S  »i    l  -    i),  1  id  7. 

-J.  U.S.   14     1894),  204  ff.    Petenen     ROm.  MitL  J     l  ha* 

attempted    to   j >r< .% «-  with    thi  al    female 

head    H^.  '>7),an<l  that  the  wh(  i nation  can  be  traced  back  to  the 

famous  sanctuary  on  ML  I  ryi  in  Si<  ilv. 
*  Urunn-l'.ru'  Itmanil 


142 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


FIG.  68.  —  So-called  Penelope.     (Rome,  Vatican.) 


THE    FIFTH    CENT!  RY 


■  13 


The  so-called  Penelope  (Fij         >,  probably  a  funereal  figure, 
preserved  in  several  copies,  one  of  which  is  in  relief,  is  most 

pleasing.  The  head  is  bent  forward,  resting  on  the  right  hand.1 
The  left  with  the  palm  pressed  flat  against  her  seat  supports  the 
body  ei  ictly  as  in  a 
sepulchral  relief  from 
Thespiae  in  the  Athe- 
nian Museum.1  A  dia- 
dem is  pushed  low- 
down  on  the  forehead. 
and  over  the  head  is 
thrown  a  thick  veil 
that  somewhat  shades 
her  face,  which  is  very 
calm.  It  is  only  in 
the  attitude  that  grief 
is  expressed.  This 
copy  has  been  mui  h 
restored.  The  rock 
should  be  replaced  by 
a  chair  with  a  work- 
basket  under  it,  as  in 
other    repli<  The 

garment,  a  <  hi  ton  with 

sleeves,  lias  much  more  elaborate  folds  than  the  drapery  of  the 
res  from  Olympia,  and  the  assignment  to  this  period  must  be 
regarded  as  doubtful.  There  is,  of  course,  no  support  for  the 
current  name  "Penelope."  But  under  whatever  name  it  passes 
it  has  a  certain  (harm  that  ever)  one  must  feel. 

I"  this  period  almo  linly  belongs  the  so-called  Spinario 

(I  boy  engaged  in  pulling  a  thorn  from  his  foot.     This 

1  The  Vatican  copy,  here  giv« 

Another  bead,  in  ihe   Berlin  Museum     No  b  may  b« 

■a  original,  i  ht  hand,  which  held  the  v< 

■  Kabba       .  I  Kvwri  tov 'E$piko  17. 


Fig.  69.  —  Spinario.    (k>>nr  Museum.) 


i44  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

also  exists  in  several  copies,  the  best  of  which  is  a  bronze  statue  in 
the  Capitoline  Museum.  The  theme  seems  at  first  sight  trivial 
and  out  of  place  in  serious  sculpture  of  the  early  part  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury. But  a  view  of  the  boy's  face  corrects  this  impression.  That 
face  is  immobile  and  serious ;  but  shows  no  expression  of  pain.  His 
thought  is  concentrated  on  the  act  of  pulling  out  the  thorn.  There 
can  be  little  doubt  that  the  figure  belongs  in  the  sphere  of  athletics. 
The  boy  has  run  his  race  and  won,  in  spite  of  stepping  on  a  thorn 
which  has  cruelly  wounded  him.  In  his  first  moment  of  victory  he 
pulls  it  out.  Athletics  being  to  the  Greeks  an  important  part  of 
life,  the  statue  stood  as  a  memorial  of  the  boy  who  conquered  not 
only  his  antagonists,  but  also  his  pain.  The  lean,  spare  form 
shows  him  to  be  a  youth  of  about  fifteen  years.  This  figure  shows 
an  asymmetry  greater  than  any  that  sculpture  had  shown  up  to 
this  time,  but  it  is  not  unpleasing.  We  do  not  think  of  his  attitude 
but  of  his  concentration  of  thought  and  action  in  pulling  out  the 
thorn,  as  a  moment  before  he  had  been  intent  on  winning  the  race. 
Archaic  features  are  the  thick  eyelids,  which  once  held  enamel  (like 
the  bronze  head  on  the  Akropolis,  illustrated  on  page  101),  and  the 
deep  parallel  grooves  in  the  hair.  Of  course,  with  the  head  held 
in  this  position  the  hair. would  naturally  fall  down  and  cover  the 
cheeks ;  but  the  sculptor  took  no  note  of  that.  This  statue  is, 
perhaps,  not  a  copy  but  an  original. 

It  is  no  wonder  that  such  a  bold  stroke  found  imitations.  But 
every  one  has  variations  that  are  inevitably  deteriorations.  One1 
represents  the  boy  pulling  out  the  thorn  in  a  rage.  This  variation 
is  at  least  half  a  century  later  than  the  original,  perhaps  more. 
Several  of  the  replicas  are  in  marble.  One  of  the  best  of  these  is 
a  marble  head  in  the  Louvre,  which  has  hair  much  like  the  original, 
but  none  of  its  life. 

It  is  not  unlikely  that  this  original  with  which  we  started  is  a 
product  of  the  Argive  school,  which  appears  for  a  long  time  to 
have  held  sway  at    Olympia,  and    to    have    produced    especially 

1  A  bronze  found  at  Sparta,  and  now  in  the  possession  of  Edmund 
Rothschild. 


Till.    Ill  III    CEN  11  KV 


•45 


athletic  statues.     It  is.  of  course,  also  possible  that  it  is  from  the 
workshop  o(  l'yth  .  but  here  we  arc  in  the  realm  of  pure 

conjecture. 

The  statue  of  a  victorious  girl  racer  '  falls  in  this  transition  period. 
She  might  well  be  the  twin  sifter  of  the  Spinario.     This  young  girl 

with  Amazonian  traits  might,  without  the   

"restorations"  o(  a  new  nose  ami  both 
arms,  have  equalled  the  Spinario.  Even 
as  it  is,  she  is  no  mean  figure  of  a  girl 
athlete.  Her  simple  tunic  and  her 
intent  lo.>k  give  her  an  appearance  such 
as  would  make  a  Spartan  mother  proud. 
Her  face — in  the  copy  —  is  immobile. 
She  is  at  the  service  of  Sparta  and  fears 
not  to  run  in  the  stadion  for  her  city 
before  the  crowd. 

Kalamis.  —  We  turn  now  to  two  gnat 
names,  Kalamis  and  Pythagoras,  to  whom 
we  may  also  add  Hegias,  of  whom  we 
know  little.  The  work  of  Kalamis 
probably  falls  entirely  within  the  period 
of  transition,  while  Pythagoras  was  also 
busy  after    :  .'-'   ami  was   practically 

contemporary  with  Myron. 

The  1  i  in  which  Lucian  held 

Kalamis,  espei  ially  his  Aphrodite,  called 

indra,  has   led   t'>   attempts   to  assign 

to  him  the  original  of  some  of  our  (  opies. 
It  was,  hours  .-r.  a  mistake  to  try  I 
his  name  to  the  athletic  type  represented 
by  the  ( Ihoiseul  ( louffiei     "  Vpollo"  and 

"Apollo"  of  the  Omphalos  (Fig.  70).    To  b  an  artist 

of  that  tun  but  the  *  nameless  grace,"  fol  which 

kmano,  No.    11.  belt,  fftrmts,  35  (1900).  '  I1 

i.i.  I  ig,  2 


I  >l    the 

1  »m| 

ira.) 


146  GREEK    SCULPTURE 

Kalamis  was  distinguished,  would  lead  us  to  something  very  dif- 
ferent from  the  athletic  type.  Moreover,  in  the  list  of  his  works 
the  athlete  is  conspicuously  absent.  In  fact,  Kalamis  is  credited 
with  nearly  everything  except  athletes.  He  was  very  prolific, 
working  over  a  wide  area,  and  in  bronze,  marble,  and  gold  and 
ivory.  The  loss  of  every  trace  of  his  work  is  one  of  the  greatest 
losses  in  the  history  of  sculpture.  It  is  small  gain  that  Cicero1 
tells  us  "  Kalamis'  works  are  hard,  but  yet  softer  than  those  of 
Kanachos  "  ;  and  Quintilian2  speaks  to  the  same  effect.3 

Pythagoras.  —  The  attempt  to  ascribe  something  tangible  to 
Pythagoras,  of  whom  we  know  painfully  little,  is  in  recent  times 
somewhat  persistent.  Waldstein  has  made  a  good  case  against 
Conze,4  Winter,5  and  Furtwangler fi  in  making  the  "  Apollo  of  the 
Omphalos  "  at  Athens  an  athlete.  Certainly  the  statue  never  had 
any  connection  with  the  Omphalos.  It  seems  hardly  possible  that 
one  could  look  on  that  muscular  form  with  the  hair  bound  up  in 
the  fashion  of  athletes  without  recognizing  in  it  an  athlete.  That 
he  belongs  in  our  period  is  shown  by  the  form  of  the  pubes  hair. 
When  Waldstein r  goes  farther  and  attempts  to  prove  that  the  orig- 
inal statue  of  this  type  was  a  work  of  Pythagoras  his  case  is  not 
so  clear.  Pythagoras  was  a  celebrated  sculptor  of  athletes,  and 
there  ends  our  certainty.  The  appearance  of  veins  and  sinews  on 
the  arms  of  the  replicas  is  not  sufficient  to  prove  their  Pythagorean 
origin,8  inasmuch  as  these  are  already  strongly  marked  on  the  fallen 
warrior  from  the  east  gable  of  Aegina.  Some  day  we  may  have  a 
genuine  Pythagorean  statue ;  but  that  is  doubtful,  now  that  no 
more  light  can  come  from  Olympia  and  Delphi.     This  is  another  of 

1  Brutus,  10.  70 :  Calamidis  dura  ilia  quidem,  sed  tamen  molliora  quam 
Canachi. 

2  Inst.  Orat.  12.  IO.  7:  Jam  minus  rigida  Calamis  \fecii\. 

3  It  has  been  suggested  that  there  were  two  sculptors  named  Kalamis,  one 
of  the  fifth  century,  the  other  of  the  fourth.  See  Reisch,  Jahresh.  d.  oesterr. 
Arch.  Inst.  9  (1906),  199-268;    Studniczka,  Kalamis,  Leipzig,  1907. 

4  Beitrage,  19.  6  Jahrb.  2  (1887),  234.  6  Roscher,  Lex.  i.  456. 

7  J.H.S.  2  ( 1881),  332  and  Essays  on  the  Art  of  Pheidias,  323. 

8  Pliny,  34.  59 :  Hie  primus  nervos  et  venas  expressit. 


THE    FIFTH    I  EN  ll'KY  147 

the  greatest  gaps  in  our  knowledge,  inasmuch  as  this  Samian  who 
migrated  to  Rhegion  was  probably  the  equal  of  Myron. 

The  attempt  to  find  the  style  of  Pythagoras  in  the  youth  from 
Perinthos '  and  in  other  athletes  has  not  met  with  convincing 
success,  although  Furtwangler  has  provisionally  established  a 
Pythagoras  group/ to  which,  however,  the  Perinthos  head  is  not 
admitted. 

Hegias.  —  Of  Hegias,  ail  Athenian,  who  has  the  honour  of  being 
called  the  first  teacher  of  Pheidias,  we  know  next  !■  >  nothing,  cm  ept 
that  his  style  was  stiff  and  archaic.4  What  he  taught  Pheidias  is  not 
known.     What  little  credence  the  storj  imes  from  the  fa<  t 

that  Hegias  was  not  famous  enough  to  have  legends  of  greatness 
attached  to  him. 

Age  of  the  Gri  \i    Masters 

Myron.  —  It  is  a  relief  to  turn  from  a  series  of  artists  who,  de- 
spite the  efforts  made  to  fasten  on  them  this  or  that  statue  in 
museums,  still  remain  mere  names,  to  the  great  masters  of  the  fifth 
century.  We  begin  with  Myron  as  the  oldest  of  the  group,  whose 
dibut  falls  in  the  period  of  transition,  Iii^  birth  may  be  put  .•> 
early  as  the  close  of  the  sixth  century,  since  his  son  Lykios  had  in 
446  b.c.  acquired  sufficient  celebrity  as  a  sculptor  to  be  <  hosen  to 
make  two  groups  of  horse  and  rider,  set  up  on  either  side  of  the 
approach  to  the  Propylaea  at  Athen 

Myron  probably  bad  only  a  slight  priority  in  age  over  the  other 

two  stars  of  the  first  magnitude,  Polykleitos  and  Pheidias,  who  with 

him   illumined  the  skv  of  Gri  That  they  were  .ill  at  work  in 

4501..'.  ii  made  certain  by  the  recently  discovered  Oxyrhynchoe 

>nt  uning  a  list  of  Olympic  vi< 

1  Ath.  Mitt.  [6  (1891),  313.  •   ' 

•  Tip   most  •  labi  rate  d  "i   Pyth  :      ■.       . 
ilt  I                         105. 

1  Quiotilian,  In  t.  Orat    12.  i".  7 :  Dm  "\- 

■  Lolling,  Delh  »     1  -  ■  .  .  1 

•  Robert,  Hern    .  ■       141  ff.     Krom  this  papyrus  it  appears  that 


148  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

The  statement  that  Myron  was  a  pupil  of  the  Argive  master, 
Hagelaidas,  is  thoroughly  credible  on  chronological  grounds.  Furt- 
wangler,1  however,  prefers  to  insert  Hegias  as  a  step  from  the  Ar- 
give master  to  Myron,  in  whom  he  sees  Argive  traits.  There  is 
little  doubt  that  Myron  was  a  Boeotian,2  and  became  an  Athenian 
by  the  annexation  to  Athens  of  a  considerable  strip  of  Boeotian  ter- 
ritory on  the  south  side  of  Kithairon,  including  Eleutherae,  Myron's 
birthplace,  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  any  of  Myron's  character- 
istics can  be  ascribed  to  his  Boeotian  origin.  Pausanias  constantly 
calls  him  'A^vatos.3  He  is  best  known  by  his  Diskobolos  and  his 
Marsyas,  in  both  of  which  he  has  thrown  archaic  stiffness  to  the 
winds  and  far  outrun  in  freedom  the  makers  of  the  Tyrannicide 
group.  He  worked  in  bronze,  by  preference  in  Delian  bronze  ; 
but  if  we  have  no  original  from  his  hand  we  have  unmistakable 
copies  in  marble  of  two  of  his  works. 

The  best  copy  of  the  Diskobolos  is  that  now  practically  inacces- 
sible in  the  Lancelotti  Palace  in  Rome.4  It  may,  in  fact,  be  called 
a  superb  copy.  It  agrees  exactly  with  Lucian's  description5  of  the 
original.  "  The  discus-thrower,"  he  says,  "  is  bent  down  into  the 
position  for  the  throw,  turning  his  head  toward  the  hand  that  holds 
the  disk ;  and,  all  but  kneeling  on  one  knee,  he  seems  ready  to 
straighten  himself  up  at  the  throw." 

We  have  before  us  in  Fig.  71a  lithe,  vigorous  youth  in  a  mo- 
mentary attitude,  but  showing  in  every  line   the  youthful  victor 

Myron  was  still  working  in  448  B.C.,  and  Polykleitos  in  452  B.C.  That  Pheidias 
was  at  that  time  at  the  acme  of  his  powers  has  never  been  in  doubt.  Thus 
Pliny  was  not  in  error  in  calling  Myron  and  Polykleitos  aequales  et  con- 
discipuli. 

1  Masterpieces,  53. 

2  A  later  sculptor,  perhaps  of  the  same  family,  bore  the  name,  Mvpwv 
Qrjfiaios,  Loewy,  Inschriften  griechischer  Bildhauer,  154. 

8  Paus.  6.  2.  2;   6.  8.  4. 

4  Found  in  1781  on  the  Esquiline.  Other  copies  exist  in  the  British 
Museum,  in  the  Lansdowne  Collection,  in  the  Museo  delle  Terme,  and  in  the 
Vatican. 

6  Pkilopstudes,  18. 


THE    FIFTH    i  EN  11  RY 


149 


who  must  in  the  next  moment  unfold  his  beauty  of  body,  limbs,  and 
face,  while  he  receives  the  plaudits  of  thousands  who  Bee  his 
disk  speeding  beyond  the  marks  of  the  other  competitors.  No- 
where else  do  we  see  so  well 
the  spirit  of  the  great  games 
in  bodily  form.  "This  one 
thing  I  do."  The  running 
and  the  wrestling  were  long 
drawn  out  ;  but  the  throw  of 
the  disk  was  over  in  one 
supreme  effort.  This  right 
leg  will  not  sustain  the  ter- 
rible strain  for  more  than  a 
moment. 

rit  of  (ireek  sculp- 
ture inclined  so  much  to  re- 
pose and  calm  that  it  is  no 
wonder  that  Quintilian  should 
b  iy  Quid  fii/n  distortum  tt 
elaboratum  </t/<n/t  est  ille  dis- 

r  bolus  Myronis  ? 
To  appreciate  the  statue 
fully,   w  it  think  of  the 

I  inal  bronze  poised  upon 
the  right  foot  and  silhouetted 
ime    background. 
Th<-  111  trble  copies  were  of 
ry  dependent  <>n  the 
trunk,    which    detracts    much    from   the  Not    the 

e  points  of  superiority  of  the  original  must  have 
q  its  poising,     l    '•>)  the  poorly  photographed  at  that, 

■hows  the  sinews  of  the  right  hand  Btrongly  marked.    The  ex 

be  due  in  part  to  the  copyist;  but  it  may 
doubted  whether  Myron  attempted  to  portraj  emotions.    Tin- 
head,  though  la<  kii  '1  expression,  is  ol  a  high-bred  type  with. 


71.  —  M  • 

lotti  I'. 1  me.) 


i !  ..mi 


150  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

a  high  crown.1  The  hair-.is  somewhat  slighted,  as  was  probably 
the  case  with  the  original.2 J 

Another  athletic  statue  representing  Ladas,  a  runner  falling  in 
death  just  as  he  crosses  the  line,  had  much  more  celebrity  than 
this  nameless  discus-thrower,  and  portrayed  probably  an  even 
higher  degree  of  tension.  A.  Mahler3  believes  that  Ladas  is 
represented  in  the  Naples  "  wrestler  "  to  the  left.4  Both  these  so- 
called  wrestlers  at  Naples  are  doubtless  runners. 

Another  work  of  Myron  which  exists  in  copies  is  the  Satyr,5 
Marsyas,  who  was  about  to  pick  up  the  flutes  which  Athena  had 
thrown  away  in  disgust  on  seeing  her  distorted  face  reflected 
in  the  water  as  she  tried  to  play  on  them.  He  is  represented 
as  he  appeared  the  moment  after  Athena  had  charged  him  to 
let  the  vile  things  alone.  The  muscular  action,  which  in  the 
Diskobolos  was  pending,  has  here  already  taken  place.  The  ten- 
sion has  passed  over  into  another  rather  constrained  position. 
Either  by  chance  or  because  of  the  celebrity  of  the  original  we 
have  several  replicas  of  this  scene.6  The  statue  in  the  Lateran 
Museum  best  represents  the  muscular  strain  in  the  Satyr  as  he 
recoils  from  the  stern  goddess.  But  perhaps  never  has  the  fever 
for  restoration  shown  itself  so  ridiculously  as  in  this  statue.  Be- 
sides some  other  restorations  of  little  importance,  Marsyas  has 
received  two  new  arms;   and,   of  all  things  in  the   world,  he  is 

1  Furtwangler  has  discovered  in  the  Louvre  a  cast  of  the  head  of  the 
Diskobolos  which  brings  out  the  fine  features  far  better  than  any  photograph 
that  had  ever  been  secured. 

2  Pliny,  34.  58 :  Capillum  et  pubem  non  emendatius  fecisse  quam  rudis 
antiquitas  instituisset. 

3  Poly k let,  17. 

4  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  354  ;   Von  Mach,  289. 

5  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  208;    Von  Mach,  65  a. 

6  A  coin  of  Athens,  a  sculptured  relief  on  a  marble  vase  from  the 
Finlay  Collection,  now  in  the  National  Museum  at  Athens,  and  a  red-figured 
vase  in  Berlin,  reproduce  the  whole  scene.  Besides  these  there  is  a  bronze 
statuette  of  Marsyas  from  Patras,  now  in  the  British  Museum,  and  a  marble 
statue  in  the  Lateran  Museum  at  Rome. 


THE    FIFTH    CENTURY 


i  5  i 


restored  playing  the  castanets  to  his  own. pas  seul.    Undoubtedly 

he  was  really  shrinking  back  in  terror.  The  attitude  of  the  l'atras 
bronze  is  probably  not  quite  correct,  but  it  escapes  being  ridiculous. 

Myron  by  no  means  confined  himself  to  statues  of  athletes  and 
figures  in  strained  attitudes.  1  lis  versatility  was  marked.  Pliny  says 
of  him  Primus  hie  multiplicasse  veritatem  videtur}  (He  made  gods 
and  heroes  in  great  numbers.  Zeus,  Apollo,  and  Asklepios  seem  to 
be  his  favourites  among  the  gods,  and  I  [eraklesand  Perseus  among 
the  heroes.1  He  appears  to  have  made  few  statues  of  goddesses, 
and  ,h  to  the  appearance  of  these  we  have  practically  no  cluey 

If  Myron  had  never  carved  a  human  figure,  he  would  have  been 
distinguished  as  a  sculptor  of  animals.  A  bronze  heifer  on  the 
Akropolis  at  Athens  would  alone  have  conferred  fame  on  him. 
In  the  almost  innumerable  epigrams  composed  in  her  praise, 
she  is  represented  as  so  lifedike  that  shepherds  tried  to  drive 
her  off  with  their  herd,  calves  came  to  draw  milk  from  her  udders, 
and  much  more  of  the  same  sort,  enough  to  prove  the  great 
esteem  in  which  this  cow  wis  held.3 

It  is  not  unusual  to  see  Myron  classed  as  a  "realist"  in  op- 
position to  Polykleitos,  who  wrought  out  his  figures  according 
to  a  scheme,  and  is  (ailed  a  "  theorist."  Pheidias  is  known  as  the 
"  idealist"  Thus  we  should  have  three  great  pupils  of  Hagelaidas 
branching  out  in  three  different  lines.  but  it  is  extremely  doubt- 
ful whether  Myron  ought  to  be  classed  as  a  realist.  He  was  pro- 
lific as  a  sculptor  of  gods,  as  the  records  show;  and  as  to  his 
much-di-  tissed  pristae*  who  have  been  thought  to  be  two  men 
working  with  a  i  p>>,-i  ut  saw,  which  would  be  realistic  in  the  ex- 
treme, a  probable  emendation  has  made  them  boxers,  pyctae? 

■  I1.,r.. 

-  I  ortwangler,  .)/./  terpietes,  165,  devote*  some  tiit\   pages  to  presumable 

■  th<  k  lost    riginals.     Hut  her  m  ill''  realm  of  controversy. 

*  In  •'■.  I  luvre  Cabinet  des  Medaillea  there  i-.  a  small  bronze  figure  "f 
.t       1  which  Collignon  iciate  with  Myron.     It  is  a  worthy 

ition  "f  1  tic  maaterpii 
1  Pliny,  34.  57.  !  m  Dorpat  (1SS0),  9. 


152 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


Several  other  statues  have  with  more  or  less  probability  been 
assigned  to  Myron.  The  one  that  has  perhaps  the  best  claim  is  a 
bronze  statue  (upper  half)  from  Tarsos,  now  in  Constantinople.1 
The  head  resembles  that  of  the  Diskobolos,  especially  in  the  curly 
locks  of  hair.  The  Riccardi  bust  of  a  hero  in  Florence,  as  well 
as  the  Ince-Blundell  head,  is  also  ascribed  by  Furtwangler2  to 
Myron. 

An  athlete,3  in  the  Munich  Glyptothek,  pouring  oil  into  his  hand 
may  also  have  some  claim  to  be  Myronian.      But  the  famous 

Idolino  (Fig.  72),  in  Flor- 
ence, one  of  the  most  beau- 
tiful bronze  statues  in  the 
world,  though  put  in  the 
Myronian  group  by  Kekule\ 
must  be  denied  a  place  there. 
In  fact,  it  has  been  with- 
drawn from  the  group  by 
Kekule"  himself  in  a  later 
article,  in  which  he  speaks  of 
it  as  Attic  without  asserting 
that  it  is  Myronian  (p.  161). 
The  Diskobolos  is  strained 
to  the  utmost ;  but  his  face 
is  as  cold  as  the  marble  of 
which  it  is  made.  Myron 
Fig.  72.  — Idolino.  (Florence,  Archaeological  never  attempted  to  express 
Museum-)  feelings.     In  this  he  agrees 

with  his  time.  The  day  was  still  far  off  when  Skopas  should  express 
the  intense  workings  of  the  soul.  And  yet  Myron's  figures  as 
seen  in  the  head  of  a  hero,4  calm  but  forceful,  remind^  us  somewhat 
of  Michelangelo's  work,  which  is  full  of  strength.  A  Myronian 
head  found  at  Catajo5  is  perhaps  a  more  exact  copy.  No  one 
can  extrude  the  Berlin  head.6     There  is  more  question  as  to  the 

1  Joubin,  133.  2  Masterpieces,  167,  172.   8  Brunn-Bruckmann,  Nos.  132,  135. 
1  Masterpieces,  167.         6  Ibid.,  169.         6  Ibid.,  170. 


THE    FIFTH    CEN  ll  RY  153 

Myronian  high-crowned  heads  which  form  a  group,  the  Ince- 
Blundell  head,  the  Perinthos  head,  and  best  of  all  the  high- 
crowned  head  frojn  Copenhagen. 

Polykleitos.  -^  Polykleitos,  though  known  as  the  great  master  of 
the  Argive  school  in  the  next  generation  after  I  [agelai'das,  was  prob- 
ably a  Sikyonian  by  birth.1  He  belonged  to  a  family  of  sculptors, 
some  of  whom  worked  at  Sikyon  and  others  at  Argos)  The  Argive 
and  Sikyonian  schools  had  been  affiliated  since  the  times  of  Dipoi- 
nos  and  Skyllis  :  and  this  close  association  covers  the  sixth,  filth, 
and  fourth  centuries.  In  this  Argive-Sikyonian  family  the  names 
Polykleitos,  Patrokles,  and  Naukydes  appear  twice.  Some  of  these 
sculptors  recorded  themselves  as  "  Argives"  and  others  as  "  Siky- 
onians."  This  duplication  has  given  rise  to  some  confusion. 
Works  of  Polykleitos,  the  grandson  or  grand-nephew,  have  been 
ascribed  to  the  older  and  greater  sculptor,  who  thus  appeared  as 
a  wonderful  example  of  longevity.  'Phis  contemporary  of  Pheidias,1 
in  460  B.C  a  >'  lllptor  of  renown.1  has  been  represented  as  working 
after  404  n.c.  on  the  trophy  set  up  at  Amyklai  to  commemorate  the 
overthrow  of  the  Athenians  at  Aigospotamoi.  Happily)  it  is  now 
made  quite  certain  that  Polykleitos,  the  younger,  is  responsible  for 
all  works  bearing  the  name  Polykleitos  after  the  completion  of  the 
great  gold  and  ivory  statue  in  the  new  Argive  Heraion.  probably 
shortly  after  420  b.C.  It  was  doubtless  he  who  was  engaged  on  the 
trophy  at  Amyklai.4  The  fact  that  he  was  architect  of  the  famous 
Tholos  at  BpidaUTOS  and  of  the  theatre  at  the  same  place,  assigns 
him  mainly  to  the  fourth  century  B.C 

The  migration  of  the  great  Polykleitos  from  Sikyon  to  Argos 
was  a  natural  and  easy  step.     The  distance  was  a  day's  walk;  the 

1  Pliny,  34.  55!  Polyclitut  Suyonius  Ageladae  discipuius, 

•  Plato,  ;2S  c,  31 1 

*  I*hc  Oxyrhynchos  Papyrus,  with  list  of  Olympian  victors,  data  the 
Kyniskos  statue  at  4'x;  b.c.     See  p,  161,  note  3.     Cp.    Robert,  ffermes,  35 

.  1  11. 
4  Polykleitos,  the  younger,  probably  took  n<>  paini  t"  distinguish  himiell 
by  Inscription!  on  his  works  from  tbe  greater  artist  ..1  the  family,  bearing  the 

name  na: 


154  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

two  cities  were  Dorian  and  their  schools  of  sculpture  affiliated. 
It  may  be  that  Polykleitos  felt  that  he  had  something  to  learn  from 
the  veteran  Hagelaidas  before  his  death.  Their  collaboration,  per- 
haps brief,  is  made  possible  by  supposing  Polykleitos  to  have  gone 
to  Argos  immediately  after  the  dedication  of  his  Kyniskos  statue 
in  460  B.C.,  when  he  may  well  have  been  over  twenty  years  of  age, 
and  may  already  have  executed  some  other  commissions.  There 
is  no  good  reason  for  the  persistent  attempt  to  make  a  wide  gap 
between  Hagelaidas  and  Polykleitos,  such  as  would  preclude  the 
relation  of  master  and  pupil.  Why  distrust  the  statement  that 
Hagelaidas  made  a  bronze  statue  of  Zeus  Ithomatas  for  the  Mes- 
senians  to  set  up  in  Naupaktos,  to  which  they  removed  in  455  B.C.  ? 
Four  or  five  years  of  collaboration  at  least  are  possible.  There 
can  be  very  little  doubt  that  Hagelaidas,  with  sons  for  pupils,  was 
a  commanding  figure  at  Argos.  While  the  Ligourio  statuette  may 
not  adequately  represent  his  style,  its  stocky  proportions  seem  to 
foreshadow  the  style  of  the  Doryphoros.  The  bronze  head  from 
the  Athenian  Akropolis  (Fig.  49),  the  forerunner  of  the  Apollo  of 
the  Olympia  gable,  in  which  Peloponnesian  influence  has  long  been 
recognized,  is  not  improbably  a  work  of  Hagelaidas  ;  and  it  would 
do  no  discredit  to  his  high  reputation. 

Polykleitos'  fame  was  enlarged  at  Argos  while  Pheidias  was 
working  at  Athens.  Plato  would  hardly  have  spoken  of  them  as 
contemporaries  and  of  equal  renown  if  Polykleitos  had  come  upon 
the  stage  shortly  before  Pheidias  was  leaving  it.  Both  probably 
closed  their  careers  with  their  great  chryselephantine  statues,  Poly- 
kleitos outliving  Pheidias  by  about  fifteen  years.  While  Pheidias 
tasted  the  bitterness  of  envy,  hate,  and  unjust  accusation,  dying  in 
prison,  Polykleitos  probably  lived  on  in  serene  tranquillity  to  the 
end,  controlling  with  his  personality  and  talent  the  Argive  school, 
of  which  he  was  the  undisputed  head.  His  chryselephantine 
Hera  was  by  many  preferred  to  Pheidias'  Athena  Parthenos.1 

The  resurrection  of  Polykleitos  began  in  1 789,  when,  in  a  building 
at  Pompeii,  recognized  as  a  palaestra,  a  marble  statue  of  an  ath- 
1  Strabo,  8.  372;   Martial,  10.  89;    Plutarch,  Perikles,  2. 


THI.    Ill  111    ( T.NTURY 


«55 


lete  now  in  the  Naples  Museum  was  brought  to  light.  In  1865 
this  statue  was  identified  by  Karl  Friederichs  as  a  copy  of  the 
Doryphoros  mentioned  by  Pliny.  I'olykleitos  himself  appears  to 
have  called  the  original  "  the  Canon," 
because  it  was  made  to  exemplify  his 
principles  as  to  the  proportions  of  the 
male  body.  A  treatise  which  he  wrote, 
setting  forth  these  principles, was  also 
called  -'('anon."  Thus  l'olykleitos 
appears  as  a  a  ientific  sculptor  with 
definite  principles.  The  Doryphoros 
g.  73)  rests  his  weight  on  the  right 
g,  while  the  left  is  thrown  back  and 
rests  <>n  the  toes  and  the  ball.  This  is 
generally  understood  to  be  a  momen- 
tary position.  The  next  moment  the 
left  foot  would  come  forward,  break 
ing  the  long  inward  curve  on  that  side 
of  the  body,  while  the  protruding 
right  side  will  be  thrown  in.  producing 
another  curve.  We  see  the  promise 
of  walking  ;  and  yet  the  shoulders 
hardly  partake  of  the  action,  but  glide 
along  horizontally.  This  position  is 
in  a  sense  theoretical.1  Here  is  none 
of  thu  energy  which  Myron  threw 
into  his  Diskobolos. 

b   his  b<  en  said  that  in  the  Do- 
ryphoros   Polykleitos  puts  before  us 


^K         gj^jfl 

kJl     ^ 

■  19 

I  IG.  73.  —  Polykleitos'  Doryphoros. 
(Naples  Museum.) 


Of 


a    man. 


not  a   man,  but  the  body 
The    work    leaves    the    spectator    cold.       Repose 


1  Mahler  (Pi lyklet,  2  "l  rstehl  in  Ruhe  and  ist  weder  im  Schreiten 

begrii  I  :ilt  er  inne  im  ^<  liritt."    Thii  m<-.uis  thai  the  u^urc  is  simply 

• -,  l«ut  «.ii«    can  hardly  fail  to  set-  the  suggestion  that   it  is  ready  t>> 
"I. 
a  Von  Mach,  O-eeA  Sculpture,  //>  Spirit  and  Principle!,  251. 


156  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

is  here,  but  no  freedom.  The  Canon,  to  call  it  by  the  sculptor's 
designation,  appears  to  embody  a  scale  of  proportions.  The 
finger's  breadth  x  4  =  the  palm,  the  breadth  of  the  hand  ;  the 
palm  x  4  =  the  length  of  the  foot ;  the  head  X  4  =  the  breadth 
of  the  shoulders ;  and  the  head  x  7  =  the  total  height  of  the 
body.  These  are  only  samples.  It  is  to  be  remembered  that 
Pythagoras  of  Rhegion,  who  was  Polykleitos'  senior,  emphasized 
numbers  in  his  theory  of  form.  In  some  of  Polykleitos'  heads, 
especially  in  that  of  the  Doryphoros,  critics  have  recognized  a  sort 
of  rectangular  structure.  The  nose  is  like  a  pillar  cut  off  at  the 
bottom,  with  nothing  to  rest  on.  The  skull  broadens  out  at  the 
back,  so  that  a  horizontal  section  of  it  resembles  the  section 
through  an  egg  laid  on  its  side. 

The  Doryphoros  being,  of  course,  an  athlete,  is  marked  as  a 
pentathlete  by  the  javelin  which  he  holds  over  his  left  shoulder. 
But  he  is  nearer  "parade  rest"  than  action.  The  restraint  here 
appearing  was  characteristic  of  Polykleitos  and  was  of  incalculable 
benefit  in  steadying  art  in  the  latter  half  of  the  fifth  century,  and 
long  after  his  death.  Perhaps  no  sculptor  contributed  more  to 
what  may  be  called  the  distinctive  characteristics,  "order,  regularity 
and  repose."     In  him  M^Sei/  ayav  is  ever  present. 

The  effect  of  the  Doryphoros  is  not,  however,  altogether  pleas- 
ing. It  is  heavy.  But  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  original  was 
of  bronze.  Polykleitos  worked  in  Delian  bronze.1  The  muscles, 
no  doubt,  especially  those  about  the  abdomen,  suffered  exagger- 
ation in  the  translation  into  marble.  Instead  of  good  muscle  we 
have  fat.  The  Portales  torso 2  in  Berlin  avoids  this  error  to  some 
extent.  The  marbles  lately  found  at  the  Argive  Heraic  n,  probably 
made  under  the  eye  of  the  master,  are  free  from  it. 

The  bust  of  the  Doryphoros  from  Herculaneum,3 1.  copy  made 
by  Apollonios,  of  the  time  of  Augustus,  is  interest ng  as  being 
of  bronze.     While  on  the  marble  copy  the  locks  are  flat  and 

1  His  chryselephantine  Hera  is,  of  course,  an  exception. 

2  Rayet,  Monuments  de  Part  antique,  i.  PI.  29. 
8  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  336. 


THE    Firm    CENTURY 


o/ 


simply  sketched  on  the  cranium,  here  they  are  raised,  and  prob- 
ably  give  a  touch  of  the  original.  But  to  offset  this  advantage 
Apollonios  introduced  boxers' 
ears,  a  feature  not  befitting  a 
young  pentathlete. 

A  relief  kept  for  a  long  time 
in  the  Demarcheion  at  Arj 
represents  a  youth  with  a  long 
spear  over  his  left  shoulder, 
standing  beside  a  horse.  Since 
this  was  found  at  Argos,  it  may 
be  regarded  as  a  fairly  faithful 
translation  of  the  Doryphoros 
into  relief.  The  horse,  of  course, 
is  an  addition,  makingthe  scene 
a  grave  relief.  The  numerous 
copies  of  the  Doryphoros  at- 
its  popularity.1 

The   Diadumenos  (Fig.  74), 
a  youthful  victor  in  the  game-. 
iged  in  binding  the  fillet  of 
victory  around  his  brow,   was 
little  less  famous  than  the  Dory- 
phoros, if  we  may  judge  from 
the  frequency  of  copies  and  the 
ry  notices.     Lucian  men- 
tions the  fact  that  one  hundred 
talents  were   paid    fir   it.'1     The  attitude  of  the   Doryphoros  is 
tcept   that   the  arms  are    otherwise    employed.     The 


Fig.  74- 


Polykleitos'  1  liadutm 
(Uritibli  Museum.) 


1  In  1900  the  I)rinarch<-i<>n  was  broken  ini"  by  thieves,  who  judiciously 
■elected  tin-  luable  piece  in  tin-  building. 

lidei  ili>-  Naples  i^urr,  sui  whole  statues,  seventeen 
-,  tlnr'-.  usd  tin-  bronze  bust  "I   Apollonios.     Many  "f  the 

hca'N  ]>f  toe  from  i>usk  with  whii  li  it  was  usual  t.>  adorn  gymnasia. 

•  Philofieu.:      i-      An  enormotts  ran*  considering  Greek  prii 


158  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

several  good  copies  are  all  of  slenderer  build  than  the  Dory- 
phoros.1  For  a  long  time  the  best  copy  of  the  Diadumenos 
was  that  found  at  Vaison  in  southern  France,  now  in  the  British 
Museum.  But  in  1894  a  copy  decidedly  superior,  and  better 
placed  on  its  base,  was  found  in  the  French  excavations  at  Delos.2 
This  is  now  in  the  Athenian  Museum.  Other  copies,  among  which 
the  best  are  in  Madrid,  Copenhagen,  and  in  the  British  Museum, 
attest  the  popularity  of  the  original.  The  best  of  all  these  is  that 
in  the  British  Museum,  called  the  Farnese  Diadumenos.  A 
head  in  Dresden  surpasses  all  the  other  Diadumenos  heads  in 
beauty  of  detail  and  finish.  The  Diadumenos  was  clearly  later 
than  the  Doryphoros.  Not  only  do  we  see  that  it  was  an  adapta- 
tion of  the  Doryphoros,  but  there  are  delicate  touches  which  show 
advance  in  the  master.3 

Pliny  4  tells  of  a  series  of  four  Amazons  set  up  in  the  Artemision 
at  Ephesos,  purporting  to  have  been  made  by  four  sculptors, 
Polykleitos,  Pheidias,  Kresilas,  and  Phradmon,  in  a  competition 
in  which  Pheidias  came  off  second  to  Polykleitos.  Much  ink  has 
been  wasted  over  the  assignment  of  the  various  types  to  their 
authors.  Many,  perhaps  most,  authorities  have  given  up  the 
whole  story  as  a  local  legend,  such  as  local  exegetes  love  to  in- 
dulge in.  That  four  Amazons  were  actually  set  up  in  the  temple, 
or  near  it,  is  not  improbable.  That  there  was  an  actual  compe- 
tition of  the  four  sculptors  is  possible.  But  the  story  that  the  four 
sculptors  themselves,  as  a  committee  of  award,  voted  with  the 
result  that  each  artist  received  one  vote  for  the  first  prize,  while 
Polykleitos  had  three  votes  for  the  second,  recalls  the  story  of  the 

1  Pliny  (34.  55)  emphasizes  this  difference,  calling  the  Doryphoros  viriliter 
puerum  (Lessing's  "  Ein  Jiingling  wie  ein  Mann ")  and  the  Diadumenos 
molliter  juvenem.  But  he  confesses  a  monotony  in  Polykleitos,  granting  that 
his  statues  were paene  ad  unum  exemplum. 

2  This  has,  however,  been  claimed  as  a  work  of  Pheidias  by  Furtwangler, 
Masterpieces,  244. 

8  Masterpieces,  243.     Furtwangler  goes  so  far  as  to  see  in  this  change  the 
influence  of  Attic  sculptors  in  the  latter  part  of  Polykleitos'  life. 
*  Pliny,  34.  35. 


THE    FIFTH    CI  \  I  l  RV 


i59 


distribution  of  prizes  after  the  battle  of  Salamis.     Some  declare 
that  our  Amazons  all  belong  to  a  single  type.     Others,  noticing  a 

l'raxitelean  motive  in  one  of  the  types  leaning  on  a  pillar  for  sup- 
port, would  ne  of  the  Am- 
azons to  the  fourth  century.1 

Fnrtwangler1  stands  for  the  integ- 
rity of  the  tradition  of  a  competition. 
•■  I  a  statement,"  he  says, "  has  met 
with  undeserved  contempt.  It  should 
be  considered  as  confirmed  from  the 
fa<t  that  copies  of  precisely  four 
Statues  of  standing  Amazons  still 
exist,  which  on  the  one  hand  are 
clearly  to  be  referred  to  four  differ- 
ent artists,  and.  on  the  other,  are 
evidently  <  lonely  connected  by  iden- 
tical measurements,  by  a  general 
similarity  of  conception  and  dress, 
and  by  their  belonging  to  the  same 
period  of  art." 

While  three  types  of  Amazons 
have  usually  been  recognized,  the 
Berlin  type  1  Fig.  75),  the  Capitoline 

type,  and  the  Mattei '  type,  assigned 
to       Polykleiti  Kresil  and 

I'heidias,  respectively,  Furtwangler 

<  laims  that  the  Amazon  of  the  Villa 
1  Pamfili  '  represents  the  type  of 
1'hradmon,   and    that  it   comes   nearest  to   the    1'olykleitan   type. 
That  it  st. nub   alone,  and   yet   resembles  the   Polykleitan    type 

''I  attitude  i  n  gems,  one  of  which  appears  to  belong  to  the 

fifth  century. 

-'  .1.'      -  '■  I'.runn-Briu  kmann,  No.  349. 

4  Brum  nann,  No.  ]y>;   Von  Mai  h,  121. 

1  Ma  .  1  1  1         :•  ••,  :.  .1  a-  .in  Artemis  with  a  dog. 


I  IG. 


75.      1 '( >.\  k  eitos'  Amazon, 

Hill.) 


160  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

most  closely,  agrees  with  the  fact  that  Phradmon  was  an  Argive. 
"  The  fact,"  says  Furtwangler,  "  that  only  one  copy  of  Phrad- 
mon's  Amazon  has  survived,  not  only  bears  out  the  judgement 
recorded  by  Pliny,  according  to  which  his  name  figures  last  in 
the  list  of  competitors,  but  also  explains  the  exiguity  of 
his  fame.  The  Berlin  type  has  been  generally  attributed  to 
Polykleitos  for  reasons  so  sound  that  they  need  not  be  even 
discussed."  He  also  holds  that  it  is  an  error  of  later  times 
to  have  diverged  from  the  view  of  Otto  Jahn,  who  claimed  the 
Capitol  type  for  Kresilas.  It  is  strange  to  find  Furtwangler  among 
the  conservatives,  where,  however,  he  is  probably  right.  In  the 
Polykleitos  and  the  Kresilas  types  the  wound  in  the  breast  is 
present  to  mark  the  Amazon  as  a  brave  fighter  who  had  suc- 
cumbed only  after  doing  her  best.  Pheidias  in  the  Mattei  type, 
which  had  a  head  of  Capitoline  type  put  upon  it,  appears  to  have 
chosen  a  different  motive,  and  to  have  represented  his  Amazon  as 
vaulting  upon  her  horse.  There  is,  therefore,  more  pathos  in  the 
Amazons  of  Polykleitos  and  Kresilas.  There  is  nothing  mascu- 
line about  the  forms  of  any  of  them,  and  the  spectator  yields  to 
them,  because  of  their  sex,  that  pity  which  they  disdain  to  crave. 

Of  the  work  on  which  Polykleitos'  fame  rested  in  great  measure, 
his  chryselephantine  Hera,  we  know  little.  Reports  compare  it 
with  the  Athena  Parthenos  of  Pheidias.  On  coins  of  Argos1  and 
Elis2  Hera  appears  as  the  wife  of  Zeus  in  the  guise  of  a  maiden, 
her  locks  flowing  down  from  under  her  high  and  ornamented 
diadem. 

Since  Polykleitos  was  not  a  worker  in  marble,  it  may  be  assumed 
that  he  had  no  close  connection  with  the  decorative  sculptures  of 
the  temple  of  Hera  at  Argos.  The  fact  that  these  are  of  Pentelic 
marble  points  to  a  connection  with  Athens.  It  is  highly  probable 
that  their  style  had  been  affected  by  Attic  relief,  since  Athens 
in  the  period  450  430  B.C.  forged  so  far  ahead  in  that  branch  of 
sculpture  as  to  impose  its  principles  upon  Argos.  A  half  century 
earlier  Athens  had  gone  to  school  to  Argos  ;  but  now,  by  the 
1  Coins  of  the  Ancients,  PL  26,  No.  36.  2  Ibid.,  PL  14,  No.  30. 


THE    FIFTH    CEN  I  I  RY  161 

•rtul  influence  oi  Pheidias,  the  tide  had  turned.  The  beautiful 
head  of  Parian  marble  found  in  the  recent  excavations  at  the 
Heraion,  though  claimed  by  Waldstein1  as  Polykleitan,  has  been 
declared  by  several  good  judges  to  show  Attic  features  such  as 
imply  the  presence  of  Attic  sculptors  at  Argos. 

S  veral  other  statues  and  heads  belong  clearly  to  the  Polykleitan 
sphere.  The  Westmacott  statue1'  has  with  considerable  unanimity 
been  declared  to  be  a  true  copy  of  the  famous  Kyniskos.  It 
varies  from  the  Diadumenos  in  the  attitude  of  the  arms.  The 
left  arm  hangs  down,  unoccupied,  while  the  right  is  probably  rais- 
i  fillet  t>>  the  head,  which  is  bent  down  to  receive  it.  The 
scheme,  observed  in  the  Doryphoros  and  Diadumenos,  of  throw- 
ing the  weight  of  the  body  on  the  right  leg,  is  here  reversed. 
Knowing  the  date  of  the  Kyniskos  to  be  approximately  460  B.C., 
we  m  ime  that  Polykleitos  had  not  at  that  time  conceived 

his  famous  Canon.3  In  the  attitude  of  the  beautiful  Edgar  Vincent 
head4  we  see  that  it  belongs  to  a  replica  of  the  Westmacott  statue. 
The  Dresden  Boya  is  surely  Polykleitan,  but  he  is  not  pressing 
on  a  wreath.  The  bronze  head  in  the  Louvre  from  Beneventum6 
is  no  doubt  a  Greek  original.  The  artist,  says  Furtwangler,  was 
inspired  by  Polykleitos,  "but  was  open  to  Attic  influence."  It  is 
one  of  the  finest  heads  that  have  been  preserved  from  the  wreck 
of  (ireek  sculpture.7  The  famous  Idolino  in  Florence  (p.  152), 
though  claimed  as  Myronian,  is  by  others  assigned  with  positi ve- 
to the  Polykleitan  cycle.  kekule,  who  once  pronounced  it 
a  work  of  Myron's  school,  has  more  recently  called  it  simply  Attn  ,a 

1  Waldsti  in,  7  fferaeum,  frontispi< 

inn-Brut  kmann,  No.  46. 
■The   Kyniskos  statue  could   be  absolutely   dated    l>ut   fur   the   known 

the  immediate  dedication  <>f  statues. 
*  Part*  !/</  terpueett  251,  I  ig    ioj.  b  Ibid.,  PI.  \ii.  Fig.  lis. 

'    r.rurm- l'.m.  kmann,  No,  324  ;   Von  M.e  h,  4S1. 

med  of  two  Icotinoi  twigi  lies  in  the  hair,  the  head 

■rai^ha  from  <  ttympia. 

\mtlicktn   Beriehten  <iu\  ,icn  kdniglichtn   fCunstsamm- 

1.  5,  /u..    1897.     "  '  ■'  k,,'h"rl  noch  in  die  Epoche 


i62  GREEK    SCULPTURE 

Several  other  claimants,  besides  numerous  replicas,  may  belong 
here.  Some  that  have  long  been  classed  as  Polykleitan  must  be 
excluded.  Such  probably  is  the  so-called  "  Hera  Farnese," 1  which 
bears  such  a  resemblance  to  the  Hera  head  of  the  Aktaion  metope 
of  the  Selinus  Temple  E  that  it  has  with  some  justice  been 
assigned  to  the  school  of  Kritios,2  with  the  name  of  Artemis. 
Attempts  have  been  made  to  give  a  chronology  of  Polykleitos' 
masterpieces.  The  Kyniskos,  as  represented  by  the  Westmacott 
statue,  must  come  first,  at  the  very  beginning  of  his  career.  Next, 
probably,  comes  the  Doryphoros.  The  Diadumenos  is  certainly 
later,  being  in  many  ways  a  Doryphoros  adapted  to  fit  the  new 
motive.  Any  attempt  to  give  a  more  detailed  chronology  would 
perhaps  be  venturesome. 

After  all  the  praises  bestowed  on  Polykleitos,  an  ancient  judge- 
ment debarred  him  from  the  very  highest  rank  beside  Pheidias  be- 
cause he  lacked  "  pondus,"  which  seems  to  have  belonged  to 
Pheidias  alone.  This  enigmatical  word  may  be  explained  as  the 
quality  that  made  a  line  of  Aeschylos,  when  put  into  the  scale, 
heavy  enough  to  outweigh  Euripides  with  all  his  plays,  and  more 
also.  This  may  not  be  strict  definition,  but  it  contains  a  world  of 
meaning.     Pheidias  in  the  highest  sense  had  no  rival. 

Pheidias.  —  Before  1891  it  might  be  said  that  every  one  of  the 
works  that  made  Pheidias  famous  had  perished  without  leaving  a 
trustworthy  copy.  Of  statues  made  by  his  great  contemporaries, 
Myron  and  Polykleitos,  there  existed  well-authenticated  copies. 
The  Diskobolos  and  the  Doryphoros,  at  least,  had  passed  through 
the  translation  into  marble  so  as  to  give  a  fair  idea  of  the  origi- 
nals. But  while  it  has  always  been  surmised  that  the  decorations 
of  the  Parthenon,  particularly  the  pediments  and  the  frieze,  con- 
veyed some  idea  of  his  style,  as  emanating  from  his  mind,  even 
if  he  had  not  touched  them  with  his  hand,  of  this  there  was  no  cer- 

in  welcher  der  fur  uns  durch  die  Parthenon  Sculpturen  am  eindringlichsten 
ausgesprochene  kunstlerische  Sinn  machtig  ist." 

1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  414;   Von  Mach,  461. 

2  Furtwangler,  Masterpieces,  223. 


THE    1  11-  111    CEN  V\  KV 


l63 


tainty.  In  1891,  however,  a  remarkable  discovery  of  Furtwangler 
gave  us  a  copy  of  his  Lemnian  Athena  (Pig.  76),  a  copy  much 
finer  than  those  which  represent  the  masterpieces  of  Myron  and 
Polykleitos. 

The  story  of  the  discovery  is  told  in  the  first  pages  of  the 
Masterpieces}  The  head  of  a  statue  in  Dresden  that  had  been 
terribly  "  restored  "  with  a  helmet,  on 
having  the  helmet  removed  was  recog- 
nized as  a  replica  of  the  well-known 
head  on  a  bust  at  Bologna,  let  into  a 
torso.  A  cast  of  the  I!  ilogna  head  and 
neck  was  found  to  tit  exactly  into  the 
torso  of  another  Dresden  statue,  after  a 
head  that  did  not  belong  to  it  had  been 
removed,  and  lo  !  two  practically  iden- 
tical statues  appeared,  except  that  the 
one  with  the  Bologna  head  was  the 
better.  There  could  hardly  be  a  doubt 
that  the  head  was  Pheidian.  In  fact, 
I'u<  hstein  had  alrea  ly  pointed  out 
''that  the  body  of  the  statue  comes 
nearest  in  style,  of  any  known  work,  to 
the  Parthenos  of  Pheidias."  So  much 
had  already  been  known  or  inferred 
about  the  style  of  Pheidias  that  it  re- 
quired as  much  hardihood  to  deny  as 
to  accept  the  Pheidian  features.  I'urt- 
wangler  was  not  slow  to  identify  the 
newly  discovered   life-size  statue  with 

the  Lemnian  Athena  which  was  set    up 

on  the  Akropolis  as  a  votive  offering  by 

a  band  of  kleru<  ha  emigrating  to  1  emnos  in  450  1...  .  . .  1  a  year  or 

two  later.       It  WOUld  thus  In-  about  tin   years   Older    than    the   Par- 
thenos.     There    is   no   doubt    that    it  was  of  broii/e,  as  the  marble 

1  MotterpitetSf  7. 


Pig.  i      iiiii.iii  Athena. 

(Dresden  and  Bologn.i.) 


i64  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

copies  show,  and  of  life-size.  The  mention  of  it  in  Pausanias'  route 
seems  to  place  it  near  the  inside  porch  of  the  Propylaea  and  to  the 
right.  The  goddess  is  bareheaded.  The  position  of  her  arms  indi- 
cates that  she  rested  her  lance,  held  in  her  raised  left  hand,  on  the 
ground ;  in  her  lowered  right  hand  she  probably  held  her  helmet.1 
Thus  she  appears  among  her  people,  not  as  the  fierce,  fighting 
goddess,  but  as  gentle,  affable,  and  blessing  them  in  their  going 
out.  Very  different  is  she  from  the  fierce,  giant-slaying  Athena 
in  the  gable  of  the  old  Athena  Temple.  She  chooses  to  charm 
and  please.  Lucian  describes  her  as  the  undoubted  masterpiece 
of  Pheidias,  and  borrows  from  her  for  his  ideal  beauty  "  the  out- 
line of  her  face,  the  delicacy  of  her  cheeks,  and  the  fine  propor- 
tions of  her  nose."  2  It  is  a  maiden  and  youthful  goddess  who  is 
here  represented.  Furtwangler  declares  that  "  the  eximia  pul- 
chritudo  of  the  Lemnia  of  Pheidias  is  possessed  in  a  very  high 
degree  by  the  head  which  belongs  to  the  statue  acknowledged  as 
Pheidian."  He  also  adds  that  "  the  head  was  formerly  supposed 
to  be  male,  and  a  right  instinct  underlay  this  wrong  interpretation  ; 
for  there  is  in  the  head  a  dash  of  boyishness  combined  with  femi- 
nine charm.  The  woman  in  her  is  not  yet  awake."  If  we  had 
a  good  copy  of  Pheidias'  Amazon,  we  should  probably  find  it 
also  exhibiting  some  of  this  charm. 

Of  the  Athena  Parthenos,  which  stood  in  the  Parthenon,  we  have 
a  full  description  by  Pausanias.3  There  are  also  several  replicas.4 
The  earliest,  perhaps,  of  the  extant  copies  is  the  Lenormant 
statuette5  found  near  the  Pnyx,  slightly  over  a  foot  and  a  half  high. 
Although  poorly  wrought  and  unfinished,  it  gives  several  features 

1  With  this  attitude  the  stump  of  the  arm  is  in  perfect  accord.  Several 
gems  of  the  Augustan  period  reproduce  the  upper  part  of  the  statue  and  show 
the  helmet  in  the  field.  See  Furtwangler,  Antike  Gemmen,  PI.  xxxviii,  34-38, 
and  xxxix,  32. 

2  Imagines,  6.  3  Paus.  1.  24.  7. 

4  In  addition  to  the  copies  collected  by  Schreiber  in  Die  Athena  Parthenos 
des  Pheidias,  1883,  another  copy,  from  Patras,  is  published  by  Cecil  Smith, 
Annual  of  the  British  School  at  Athens,  3  (1896-1897),  121,  PI.  9. 

6  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  38;  Von  Mach,  98. 


THE    111  I'll    CENTURY 


165 


of  the  great  original  not  elsewhere  presented.  The  dress,  includ- 
ing the  aegis  and  helmet,  is  much  slighted.  A  statuette  of  this 
size  could  not  possibly  give  all  the  details  of  the  great  chrysele- 
phantine original,  nearly  forty  feet 
high.  Its  thief  merit  is  that  it 
represents  the  combat  of  Greeks  and 
Amazons  on  the  shiel  I,  and  the  birth 
of  Pandora  on  the  base.1  Both  these 
representations  are  omitted  in  the 
Varvakeion  statuette  '  |  Fig.  77)  found 
This  is  twice  as  large  as  the 
Lenormant  figure,  and  carefully  carved 
and  polished.  But,  being  a  copy  of 
Roman  times,  it  lacks  the  freshness  of 
the  probably  earlier  unfinished  copy. 
While  it  omits  the  two  scenes  of  the 
Lenormant   figure,   it    has   features    of 

iriginal  which  the  latter  does  not 

nt.  The  face  is  indifferent  and 
leaves  the  spectator  cold,  but  the 
helmet  is  most  elaborate.  On  its  top 
is  a  Sphinx  between  two  Pegasoi,  all 
three  supporting  a  triple  crest;  on 
either  side  are  cheek  guards,  turned 
up.a  From  various  <  opies  we  may  be 
sure  that  the  helmet  was  heavily  loaded  with  ornamentation. 
We  can  hardly  doubt  that  on  the  colossal  original  all  the  orna- 

1  We  shuiil'l  hardly  know  thi  m  n   it  do!  given  by  Pausani 

from  a  sc  hool  in  Athena  mar  which  it  was  found. 

8  A  hell  1     1    Vspasias   in  the  Vienna   Museum     Fowler  and 

Wheel  tth  Arch.,  408,  Fig.    ;;<•     lias  besides  all  this  a  row  of  hi 

galloping  out  of  th<-  bead   iust  above  1 1  * < -  forehead;    and  tin-  same  feature 

n  th<-  polychrome  marble  head  (Kauffman)  in  the  Berlin  Museum 

ittfikt  Denkm&ler,  i.   l'l.    j  .     I      Mm  gold   medallions   from   the  <  rimea 

•  ml  Wheeler,  150,  Fig  bow  other  details,  an  owl,  foi  instance, 

cs. 


Athi  na  1  bi  thenos. 
(Athens,  National  Museum.) 


1 66  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

mentation  which  the  small  copies  show,  and  more  also,  was 
present.  High  up  in  the  rather  dark  cella  beaten  gold  would 
reflect  a  radiance  from  the  light  that  came  in  through  the  door.1 
Over  the  breast  of  the  goddess  was  the  aegis  in  the  form  of 
a  collar.  In  her  right  hand  she  held  a  Nike  moving  at  a  right 
angle  to  the  goddess,  who  thus  appears  to  be  passing  victory 
along  to  her  friends.  It  has  been  maintained  that  the  column 
supporting  her  right  hand  was  not  present  in  the  original.  But 
since  the  Nike  was  over  six  feet  high  and  largely  of  gold  it  prob- 
ably needed  the  support. 

The  shield  of  Athena,  which  in  the  Varvakeion  copy  is  plain, 
shows  in  the  Lenormant  copy  an  indifferent  representation  of  the 
Amazon  battle  ;  but  there  is  preserved  the  greater  part  of  another, 
called  the  Strangford  shield,2  on  which  the  figures  in  relief  are 
much  clearer.  Here  a  bald  old  man  nearly  naked  is  raising  an 
ax  or  a  great  hammer  with  both  hands,  while  a  younger  man,  with 
a  helmet  and  other  defensive  armour,  has  his  arm  thrown  back  for 
delivering  a  blow,  in  such  a  way  as  to  conceal  his  face.  As  early  as 
the  time  of  Plutarch 3  the  story  arose  that  the  old  man  was  Pheidias 
and  the  young  man  Perikles.  This  audacity  or  blasphemy,  as  it  was 
called,  was  said  to  be  one  cause  of  Pheidias'  arrest  and  imprison- 
ment. The  story  may  be  paralleled  by  similar  stories  that  spring  up 
about  other  artists.  In  the  belly  of  both  shields  of  the  small  copies 
appears  a  serpent  which  is  supposed  to  represent  the  earth-born 
Erichthonios,  the  guardian  of  the  Akropolis.  Neither  shield  con- 
tains on  the  inside  the  gigantomachy.  Nor  does  the  battle  of  the 
Centaurs  and  Lapiths  on  the  soles  of  the  shoes  appear  in  any  copy. 
But  the  gorgoneion,  used  as  a  boss  for  the  shield,  is  reproduced 
on  the  Strangford  shield  and  on  the  otherwise  plain  surface  of  the 
shield  of  the  Varvakeion  figure. 

1  Few,  if  any,  now  claim  that  there  was  an  opening  in  the  roof  of  Greek 
temples.  The  temple  at  Bassai  was  an  exception;  so  also  the  Olympieion, 
a  Roman  work  of  Hadrian's  time. 

2  Michaelis,  Der  Parthenon,  PI.  xv.  34. 

3  Perikles,  31.     Plutarch, -however,  says  the  old  man  was  hurling  a  stone. 


THE    FIFTH    CEN  l  URY  167 

There  is  one  marked  difference  in  dress  between  the  earlier 
Lemnia  and  the  later  Parthenos.  In  the  former  the  garment  is 
shorter,  reaching  only  a  little  below  the  ankles,  while  that  of  the 
Parthenos  trails.  That  of  the  so-called  Mourning  Athena  (Fig. 
91)  is  still  shorter,  not  covering  the  ankles. 

In  the  Athena  l'arthenos,  Pheidias  not  only  aimed  to  represent 
the  highest  conception  of  the  divine  being  who  was  supposed  to 
be  shaping  the  life  of  Athens,  but  also,  probably,  to  set  forth 
in  bodily  form  the  essence  of  Athenian  life  in  the  brilliant 
fifth  century  before  its  downfall.  The  time  was  singularly 
auspicious.  The  Persian  had  been  driven  back.  Athens  was 
acknowledged  to  represent  the  mind  of  Greece,  and  half  of  it 
was  tributary  to  her.  Athens  could  afford  to  lavish  immense  sums 
on  this  one  figure,  and  did  so,  although  there  were  those  who 
cried  out  against  it.  In  438  k.c,  or  shortly  afterwards,  it  was  com- 
pleted and  housed  in  the  splendid  Parthenon.  It  was  not  long, 
however,  before  the  evil  days  of  the  Peloponnesian  War  came  on, 
and  Athena  was  despoiled  of  her  golden  garments  little  by  little 
with  the  hope,  at  first,  of  restoring  them.  Though  often  repaired 
and  ever  losing  more  and  more  of  its  first  magnificence,  the  statue 
-till  admired  by  Pausanias  in  the  second  century  a.d.  No  one 
knows  when  it  finally  disappeared.  It  probably  fell  gradually  to 
pieces  without  needing  Christian  iconoclasm  to  complete  its  ruin. 

It  has  seemed  to  some  not  unreasonable  to  regard  the  costly 
in  aerial  as  having  contributed  a  large  share  of  the  fame  of  this 
statue.  Others  felt  that  only  in  bronze  could  the  finest  technique 
show  itself,  when  the  work  comes  "  to  the  nail."  But  the  con- 
is  of  antiquity  was  against  this  view,  and  the  1  hryselephantine 
colossus  was  no  doubt  equal  to  its  fame. 

odes  the  Lemnia,  which  was  of  life-size,  there  was  also  a  co- 
lossal bronze  statue  of  Athena  in  the  open  air  on  the  Akropolis.  At 
a  time  mm  h  later  than  its  origin  it  was  called  the  Promachos,  "  the 
npion."  It  was  one  of  the  must  conspicuous  objects  on  the 
Akropolis.  A  <  oin  on  which  the  Parthenon  'Iocs  no!  appear  makes 
it  more  prominent  than  the  Propylaea  and  the  Ere<  btheion,   Athena 


1 68  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

seems  to  be  facing  the  Propylaea  but  turning  strongly  to  the  right, 
as  if  to  look  over  the  north  wall  down  upon  the  city.  Thus  we 
see  why  Alaric  and  his  Goths  could  be  frightened  at  the  sight  of  this 
armed  goddess  looking  down.1  Pausanias  says  that  those  sailing 
in  from  Sounion  saw  her  helmet  and  the  gilded  point  of  her 
bronze  spear,2  although  Hymettos  shuts  out  the  view  of  the 
Akropolis  until  one  is  nearly  off  Phaleron. 

Besides  various  statuettes,  the  Torso  Medici3  in  the  Ecole  de 
Beaux-Arts  in  Paris,  long  ago  recognized  as  Pheidian,  has  also 
been  thought  to  have  affinities  with  both  the  Lemnia  and  the 
Parthenos.  With  absolutely  undeveloped  breasts,  it  has  splendid 
drapery.  The  left  supporting  leg  is  encased  in  the  drapery,  which 
is  columnar  in  its  character.  The  free  right  leg  is  in  contrast 
thrown  out,  showing  the  finer  folds  ot  the  linen  chiton.  Especially 
fine  is  the  triangular  bit  between  the  right  foot  and  the  stiff 
perpendicular  folds  of  the  peplos.  It  is  this  Medici  torso  which 
Furtwangler  has  selected  as  representing  the  colossal  Promachos. 
There  is  a  coin  of  Athens  representing  probably  the  Promachos 
with  the  spear  diverging  sharply  from  her  body.4  This  coin, 
however,  conveys  little  information  about  the  style  of  the  original, 
and  there  must  always  be  some  doubt  as  to  the  Medici  torso  being 
a  correct  copy  of  the  Promachos.  Furtwangler,  with  perhaps  too 
great  confidence  in  inadequate  copies,  regards  this  Promachos 
as  later  than  the  Parthenos,  and  assigns  it  to  an  elder  Praxiteles, 
"  named  as  the  artist  by  a  tradition  which  was  probably  derived 
from  the  actual  inscription  on  the  statue."  He  denies  that  the 
figures  carved  by  Mys  after  designs  by  Parrhasios  were  put 
upon  the  shield  as  an  afterthought  because  it  looked  too  plain. 
He  puts  the  Promachos  at  440  B.C.,  when  Parrhasios  could,  he 
thinks,  be  already  working ;  and  Mys  fits  the  date  of  Parrhasios. 
All  this  is  possible ;  but  there  is  no  convincing  proof  that  the 
figures  were  not  carved  later,  as  is  usually  supposed.     The  great 

1  Zosimos,  Historia  Nova,  5.  6.  2.  2  Paus.  I.  28.  2. 

8  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  171 ;    Von  Mach,  101. 

4  Imhoof-Blumer  and  Gardner,  Numis.  Com.  on  Pausanias,  PI.  Z,  1. 


THE    FIFTH    CENTURY  169 

question  is,  what  did  Pheidias  do  before  he  made  the  Lemnia  in 
450  B.C.,  or  a  Little  later?  What  reason  is  there  for  ascribing  to 
him  a  (  areer  of  less  than  twenty  years?  1'urtwangler  seems  to 
reject  the  existence  of  a  "  Kimonian  Pheidias."  But  Pheidias 
must  have  already  had  a  reputation  when  he  made  the  Lemnia.  It 
is  indeed  not  improbable  that  he  was  born  at  about  the  begin- 
ning of  the  fifth  century,  so  as  to  appear  on  the  shield  of  the  Par- 
then  bald  old  man.  Why  deny  him  a  long  career?  The 
statement  that  one  of  his  early  works  was  a  chryselephantine 
statue  of  Athena  at  Pellene  in  Achaea,  an  out-of-the-way  place, 
doe-  not  seem  like  fiction.  Whether  Kimon,  with  so  much  fight- 
ing on  his  hands,  ever  actively  supported  Pheidias  in  his  early 
work  is  quite  doubtful.  But  the  statement  that  Pheidias  worked 
at  Delphi  with  funds  from  Athens  and  made  a  bronze  group 
representing  Miltiades  between  Athena  and  Apollo,  with  the 
eponymous  heroes  of  the  Athenian  tribes  standing  near,  has 
nothing  improbable  in  it.  If  one  wishes  to  picture  this  group, 
he  may  think  of  it  as  something  like  the  old  Aeginetan  and 
Argive  groups.  Pheidias  doubtless  ripened  gradually  with  time. 
What  else  could  we  expect?  It  is  not  altogether  improbable 
that  he  learned  either  directly  from  Hagelai'das  or  through  the 
medium  of  the  Attic  Eiegias.      But  we  cannot  make  a  very  definite 

ture  bom  such  surmises. 

In  the  lemnia  and  the  Parthenos  we  seemed  to  have  two 
1  points.  The  Olympian  Zeus  furnishes  us  another.  It  is 
true  this  ha-  been  made  to  seem  anything  but  fixed.  Loeschc :ke,] 
whom  Collignon  follows,  puts  the  Olympian  Zeus  before  the  Par- 
thenos, influenced  by  the  consideration  that  the  temple  of  ( Olympian 
finished  in  456  B.C.  Could  not  have  remained  twenty 
empty,  waiting  for  a  <  ultUS  Statue.  There  i-  here  a  difficulty. 
Would  Sp.irta  or  EHs,  the  controlling  powers  in  the  l'eloponnesos, 
which   had   ju-t  shut   out   Athens   and    Ar.L'o-   from   the   dedication 

immediately  sent   t«.    Athens  lor  the  Athenian 
sculptor,  Pheidias,  to  put  the  crowning  glory  upon  the  temple, 
1/1,1''  Tod  mi,/  du  CAron  Us  olympischen  Z 


1 7o  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

if  he  were  a  young  man,  comparatively  unknown,  with  no  great 
career  back  of  him?  The  sculptor  who  made  the  Panhellenic 
Olympian  Zeus,  one  of  the  Seven  Wonders  of  the  world,  must  have 
gone  to  Olympia  with  his  honours  thick  upon  him,  and  called,  as  it 
were,  by  acclamation.  And  where  could  he  have  got  his  honours 
except  from  his  Athena  Parthenos? 

What  Pheidias  did  at  Olympia  made  a  lasting  impression ;  and 
even  his  descendants  continued  to  hold  there  an  honourable  office. 
He  probably  returned  to  Athens  after  completing  his  great  work  in 
five  years  with  the  aid  of  artists  already  trained  by  him.  He 
went  back,  we  may  believe,  to  Athens  to  continue  his  work,  trust- 
ing in  his  high-minded  patron.  But  jealousy  and  hatred  of  Peri- 
kles,  which  could  best  reach  him  through  his  favourite  artist,  wrought 
the  ruin  of  the  greatest  sculptor  of  the  world,  and  branded  Athens 
with  shame. 

Michaelis,  in  A  Century  of  Archaeological  Discoveries,  revives 
and  discusses  the  problem  anew * :  — 

"  According  to  a  twofold  tradition  Pheidias  either  died  in  prison 
(438)  after  the  Parthenon  had  been  completed,  or  migrated  to 
Elis  to  make  the  chryselephantine  statue  for  the  Temple  of  Zeus 
at  Olympia.  Until  recently  the  latter  version  was  accepted,  and 
the  duration  of  the  building  extended.  Certain  finds,  however, 
indicated  definitely  that  the  building  must  have  been  finished  by 
the  year  456.  Thereupon  Loeschcke  urged  the  less-accredited 
theory  :  if  Pheidias  died  in  438,  he  could  only  have  worked  at 
Olympia  before  the  building  of  the  Parthenon,  447-438;  his 
activity  there  would  then  naturally  follow  the  completion  of  the 
temple,  and  fall  in  the  fifties.  This  brilliant  conjecture  was  widely 
accepted,  although  serious  difficulties  were  raised,  partly  owing  to 
the  dubious  source  of  the  tradition,  and  partly  in  regard  to  the 
legal  proceedings.  It  was  maintained  that  the  masterpiece  of 
Pheidias  was  probably  made  later  for  the  temple,  to  take  the  place 
of  a  smaller  and  older  statue.  One  may  to-day  still  say  of  this 
question  :  grammatici  certant  et  adhuc  sub  j u  dice  lis  est:  although 
1  Page  129  of  Miss  Kahnweiler's  translation. 


I  UK    FIFTH    CENTURY  171 

the  scales  are  de»  ending  more  and  more  to  the  older  and  more 
accredited  tradition." 

The  Olympian  /ens  was  larger  in  its  proportions  than  the  Par- 
thenos.  The  temple  was  more  massive  than  the  Parthenon  ;  and 
vet  the  seated  Zeus  reached  so  high  that  it  seemed  as  if,  in  case  he 
should  rise  from  his  throne,  he  would  raise  the  roof.1  The  throne 
on  which  he  sat  was  a  wonder,  adorned  as  it  was  with  representa- 
tions of  many  of  the  most  important  figures  in  Greek  mythology. 
A  screen,  which  shut  out  the  stout  pillar  that  formed  the  support 
of  the  seat,  tilled  the  spaces  between  the  legs.  In  front  this  screen 
was  simply  painted  blue  to  form  a  fitting  background  to  the  golden 
drapery  of  the  god  ;  but  the  other  three  panels  contained  each  six 
figures  painted  by  Panainos,  probably  Pheidias'  brother.  On  the 
front  of  Zeus'  footstool  was  represented  Theseus  fighting  Amazons. 
On  the  front  of  the  pedestal  of  the  throne  was  a  relief  in  gold, 
representing  Aphrodite  rising  from  the  waves  and  received  by  Pros 
and  Peitho.  As  on  the  east  pediment  of  the  Parthenon,  the  scene 
was  closed  at  the  ends  by  Helios  and  Selene,  and  between  them 
and  the  central  group  there  were  three  pairs  of  divinities  on  either 
side.  It  must  have  been  a  splendid  composition.  It  had,  as  is 
seen  by  trues  of  the  pedestal,  a  front  of  over  twenty  feet. 

But  if  the  throne  was  glorious,  much  more  so  must  have  been 
the  god  who  sat  upon  it.  Quintilian  says  of  it  Adjecisse  aliquid 
etiam  receptae  religioni  videtur.  Dion  Chrysostomos  said  that  "  the 
nun  most  depressed  forgot  all  his  ills  in  looking  at  the  statue,  so 
much  light  and  beauty  had  Pheidias  put  into  it"1  From  these 
and  manv  other  eulogies  one  may  gather  that  Pheidias  put  benevo 
lence  into  th<  IS  well  as  awe  and    majesty,    and   made   men 

realize  that  "God's  in  his  heaven,  all's  right  with  the  world." 

This  statue,  like  the   I'arthenos.  must  have  gradually  fallen  to 
pie*  es.     It  needed  repairs  in  the  second  century  B.C.  when  Damo 
phon  of  Messene  was  called  in  for  the  purpose.     Unfortunatel)  we 

1  Strabo,  s.  553.    It  has  been   generally  estimated  at  about  eight  times 
-  I  »  riftqtulUn,  705-713. 


1 72  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

have  no  adequate  replicas.  The  Zeus  of  Otricoli,1  which  was  made 
in  Roman  times,  was  long  thought  to  be  a  copy  of  the  head,  but  a 
Greek  copy,  probably  made  in  the  fourth  century  B.C.,  which  is  now 
in  the  Boston  Museum  of  Fine  Arts,2  shows  that  the  Otricoli  head 
is  at  best  only  a  very  distant  reflection  of  the  Zeus  of  Pheidias. 

The  spirit  of  Pheidias  did  not  cease  to  be  operative  at  his  death. 
We  find  it  not  only  in  the  decoration  of  the  Parthenon,  but  con- 
tinuing afterward  in  much  humbler  art.  Such  a  man  lives  in  his 
works  after  death.  Schools  of  art  bow  down  before  the  genius 
which  can  create  ;  and  Pheidias  was  beyond  all  question  the  great- 
est creator  in  art  that  the  world  has  ever  seen. 

The  Parthenon  Sculptures 

While  Pheidias  was  making  the  Athena  Parthenos,  he  had  under 
him  a  band  of  sculptors,  probably  of  various  training,  and  with 
names  not  transmitted  to  us,  who  wrought  the  decorations  of  the 
splendid  temple  in  which  the  statue  was  to  be  housed.  Now  that  the 
statue  has  perished,  and  left  not  a  rack  behind,  the  mere  sculptured 
decorations  of  the  temple,  which  were  barely  mentioned  by  those 
who  saw  them,  have  come  to  an  honour  which  no  man  of  the  fifth 
century  B.C.,  or  even  of  the  time  of  Pausanias,  ever  thought  of  ascrib- 
ing to  them.  They  are  the  most  eloquent  witnesses  of  the  brilliant 
Age  of  Perikles,  when,  not  only  in  art,  but  in  literature  also,  Athens 
had  no  rival.  The  great  tragic  poets,  Sophokles  and  Euripides, 
were  suns  around  whom  lesser  lights  were  grouped.  Herodotos, 
too,  was  there.  Perikles  with  his  powerful  fleet  controlled  the  sea 
and  collected  tribute  from  a  great  confederacy.  Under  his  sway, 
which  he  maintained  by  the  power  of  his  personality,  Athens  be- 
came even  politically  the  chief  city  in  Greece.  The  other  Greek 
cities,  including  Sparta,  fell  into  the  second  rank.  There  were, 
to  be  sure,  those  even  in  Athens  who  murmured  against  Perikles 
for  decking  out  the  city  like  a  gaudy  courtesan  ;  but  they  were  a 
despised  minority.     The  glory  of  Athens  seemed  almost  to  justify 

1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  130;  Von  Mach,  487. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  Nos.  572  and  573. 


THE    I  11  ill    <  IN  rUR\  173 

the  suppression  of  smaller  states,  l'erikles  was  the  heart  ami 
soul  of  it  all.  For  his  plan  of  beautifying  the  Akropolis  he  is  said 
to  have  selected  as  his  right-hand  man,  Pheidias,  who  was  able  to 
inspire  and  train  a  host  of  sculptors  who  proved  by  their  works 
that  they  also  had  the  divine  afflatus. 

Perikles  found  already  existing  the  stylobate  of  a  temple 
antedating  the  Persian  War.1  The  architects,  Iktinos  and 
Kallikrates,  broadened  this  by  about  eight  feet,  and  left  about 
fifteen  feet  of  its  length  unused.  On  this  was  built  a  temple  that 
was  in  every  way  worthy  of  the  statue  which  was  placed  in  it,  was 
considerably  larger  than  the  Peisistratean  temple,  and  was  made  of 
Pentelic  marble.-'  ( >ver  two  thirds  of  the  building,  i.g.  of  the  closed 
part,  was  the  abode  of  the  goddess.  In  the  rear  of  this  was  a 
square  chamber  which  appears  to  have  been  first  called  the  Par- 
thenon,3 from  the  maidens  who  served  the  maiden  goddess  in  the 
weaving  of  her  robe  and  in  other  ways.  (  Inly  by  an  extension  of 
this  appellation  did  the  whole  building  receive  the  name  by  which 
it  i>  now  known.  These  two  parts  were  separated  by  a  wall  with 
no  doors,  and  each  had  its  own  portico  of  six  columns.  A  nar- 
row band  of  sculpture  in  low  relief,  three  feet  and  four  inches 
wide,  went  all  the  way  around  this  enclosed  part  at  the  to]),  having 
a  length  of  about  520  feet,  and  containing  over  300  figures.  This 
is  the  famous  Parthenon  frieze,  a  new  feature  in  Doric  temples. 
ind  this  cella,  which  with  the  addition  of  a  roof  would  have 
made  a  building  in  itself,  was  placed,  at  an  interval  of  about  eight 
a  line  of  columns,  forty-six  in  number,  eight  at  each  end.  sup- 
porting the  entablature  and  the  roof. 

1  DOrpf  Mitt.  27     i  ated  bis  former  view  that 

this  unfinished  temple  im  begun  after  tin    Pi  rsian   War,  ami  substantially 

.  dated  it  far  ba<  k  into  the  sixth 
century,  while  Dflrpfeld  assigns  it  to  about  510  B.<  .,  when  the  di  mot  rai  \  was 
led  by  Kleisthem 

-I!,.    tiles  wei  f  Parian   marble  which,  being  more  transparent 

than  nthrr  mar1  light  inn.  tin-  building. 

s  It  bamber  for  various  relics  and  treasures  ol 

riptioHum  Attiearum,  I,  300- ;i  1. 


174 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


Metopes.  —  This  entablature  had  a  Doric  frieze  of  metopes  and 
triglyphs  about  four  feet  high.  It  is  a  notable  exception  that 
the  metopes,  ninety-two  in  number,  are  all  sculptured.  Above 
this,  at  the  ends,  were  the  gables,  which  afforded  the  finest  field  for 
ornamentation.  The  frieze  was  in  low  relief,  the  metopes  in  high 
relief,  sometimes  almost  detached  from  the  background,  and  the 
gable  figures  in  the  round.  No  other  Greek  temple  had  all  these 
kinds  of  ornamentation. 

The  metopes  were  chronologically  the  first  of  the  sculptures. 
They  had  to  be  in  place  before  the  horizontal  cornice  and  the 

roof.  As  soon  as  they 
were  carved  they  were  slid 
down  into  the  perpendicu- 
lar grooves  in  the  triglyph 
blocks  to  the  right  and  left, 
and  the  horizontal  cornice 
was  placed  over  them. 
There  is  great  unevenness 
in  their  style ;  the  result, 
doubtless,  of  a  various  train- 
ing on  the  part  of  the  work- 
men. Here,  and  here  only, 
on  the  Parthenon  do  we 
feel  the  absence  of  one  con- 
trolling mind.  Some  fig- 
ures are  positively  archaic, 
and  seem  a  generation  older  than  others.  It  is  probable,  however, 
that  the  workmen  improved  as  the  work  went  on.  By  accident  the 
best-preserved  metopes,  sixteen  in  number,  now  in  the  British 
Museum,  represent  the  hackneyed  theme  of  a  struggle  between  a 
Lapith  and  Centaur.  The  Choiseul-Gouffier  metope  in  the  Louvre 
is  damaged  by  restoration.  One  on  the  north  side  and  one  on  the 
south  (well  preserved)  are  in  situ.  Another  is  in  the  Akropolis 
Museum  (Fig.  78).  But  considering  the  limitations  of  the  theme, 
it  is  striking  that  so  much  variety  has  been  introduced.     There  is 


FIG.  78. —  Lapith  and  Centaur  fighting. 
(Athens,  Akropolis  Museum.) 


THE    FIFTH    CENTURY  175 

a  series,  which  we  have  to  construct  for  ourselves,  in  which  the 
Lapith  is  increasingly  victorious,  and  the  Centaur  at  last  re- 
ceives the  death  thrust  in  his  human  back.1     In  another  series  it 

is  the  Centaur  who,  starting  from  a  drawn  battle,  presses  the  Lapith 
harder  and  harder  until  his  prostrate  form  is  trampled  by  the 
(  entaur's  hoofs.2  There  is  every  intermediate  stage.1  Some  of  the 
metopes  show  hard,  dry,  ami  spare  forms,  reminding  one  of  Kritios 
and  Nesiotes.  Others  recall  Myron.  From  these  we  goon  to  ex- 
amples of  splendid  physique  outlined  against  flowing  drapery,  as  in 
\  .  2~.  Variety  is  also  obtained  by  shifting  the  antagonists'  posi- 
tions in  the  fight  Women  are  being  carried  off  by  brutal  Cen- 
taurs. Another  Centaur  has  the  head  of  a  philosopher.  Care 
is  taken  that  no  absolute  ugliness  should  be  portrayed.  For  ex- 
ample, there  is  no  case  of  introducing  a  dead  Centaur,  which 
would  be  an  offence  to  the  eye.4  Care  was  also  taken  to  bring 
the  human  part  of  the  Centaur  into  front  view.  One  is  occasion- 
ally reminded  of  the  cause  of  all  the  trouble  by  the  introduction 
of  wine  jars,  over  which  one  Lapith  is  falling  backwards.  To  get 
an  adequate  idea  of  the  effect  of  the  whole,  one  must  remember 
that  the  figures  themselves  were  painted.  Light  green,  perhaps 
originally  blue,  has  been  seen  on  some  of  the  figures,  while  the 
background  was  red.  This  field,  bordered  right  and  left  by  dark 
blue  triglyphs,  made  a  striking  case  of  polychromy  on  Pentelic 
marble. 

Only  on  the  south  side  have  the  metopes  been  at  all  well  pre- 
served.    Those  on  the  other  sides  appear  to  have  been  deliberately 
destroyed  with  hammers.     We  should  hardly  know  what  they  rep- 
re   it   not  for  the  help  of  the  drawings  long  supposed 
to  be  from  the   hand  of  Carrey,  but  now  known  to  be  the  work  of 

1  No.  27.     The  numbers  here  given  are  from  Mi.  lia<  lis,  Der  Parthenon, 

a  N 

aN  how  die  pair  in  equilibrium.     No.  7  shows  the  Centaur 

recer.  in  No.  2  the  Centaur  is  being  throttled,  bellowing 

cut  his  ra^<-.    N<  i  .!-•,  29  repi                    ns  attacking  1  apith  women. 

4 1  'n  the  fri'  .  this  was  attempted. 


176  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

an  unknown  Flemish  draftsman,  who  accompanied  Nointel,  the 
ambassador  of  Louis  XIV  on  his  expedition  in  1674.  This  artist 
appears  to  have  spent  only  eighteen  days  on  the  Akropolis,  and 
to  have  succeeded  in  that  short  time  in  making  twenty-one  draw- 
ings, which  are  of  incalculable  value.1  The  front  contained  a 
gigantomachy  in  which  several  of  the  gods  may  be  made  out. 
Athena  is,  of  course,  there.  But  the  battle  with  the  giants  does 
not  lend  itself  so  well  to  single  combats  as  the  centauromachy. 
The  west  end  contains  duels  between  an  Amazon  and  a  Greek.2 
The  north  side  appears  to  have  contained,  among  other  subjects, 
scenes  from  the  Trojan  War.  The  series  is  interrupted  by  about  a 
dozen  Centaur  and  Lapith  groups,  while  in  the  middle  of  the  south 
side  we  see,  from  the  anonymous  draftsman,  nine  metopes  with 
scenes  probably  from  Attic  legends3  breaking  the  long  succession 
of  Centaur  and  Lapith  metopes.  The  monotony  of  thirty-two  such 
groups  in  one  long  line  must  have  been  felt  to  be  intolerable. 
There  is  no  really  adequate  explanation  of  the  fact  that  the 
metopes  on  the  south  side  were  spared,  unless  it  be  that  that 
side,  being  close  to  the  south  wall,  was  not  much  frequented,  and 
was,  therefore,  not  offensive  to  Christians  or  Turks. 

Gable  Groups  of  the  Parthenon.  —  The  most  conspicuous  adorn- 
ments of  temples  were  always  the  gable  groups.  On  the  Parthe- 
non the  gables,  over  ninety  feet  long,  had  in  the  middle  a  height  of 
eleven  feet.  There  was  room  for  colossal  figures  not  only  in  the 
middle,  but  also  at  the  ends,  where  seated  and  reclining  persons 
were  introduced.  These  have  come  down  to  us  badly  mutilated. 
Every  complete  head  but  one  is  lost  and  the  face  of  that  one  has 
suffered  abrasion.  The  destruction  commenced  on  a  large  scale 
as  early  as  the  fifth  century  a.d.,  when  the  Parthenon  was  con- 
verted into  a  church  with  the  name  Agia  Sophia.  Then  it  was 
that  the  interior  was  reconstructed,  and  the  main  entrance,  as  be- 

1  See  H.  Omont,  Athenes  au  xvii*  Siecle,  Martin  L.  D'Ooge,  The  Acropolis 
of  Athens,  341,  note  219. 

2  Ebersole,  A.J.A.  3  (1899),  409. 

3  Pernice,  Jahrbtuh,  10  (1895),  93. 


THi:    FIFTH   CENTURY  177 

came  a  church,  placed  at  the  west  end.1  The  cross  wall  was  pierced 
with  doors.  Light  was  introduced  into  the  apse  at  the  east  end 
by  making  a  large  aperture  in  the  middle  of  the  gable.  In  this 
process  the  central  group  of  probably  eleven  figures  was  removed 
more  than  a  thousand  years  before  the  visit  of  the  anonymous 
draftsman.  We  should  have  had  no  idea  of  the  subject  had  not 
Pausanias  mentioned  that  "  it  had  to  do  with  the  birth  of  Athena." 

The  west  gable  remained  practically  intact  until  1687,  although 
Poseidon's  chariot  had  already  disappeared.'-'  In  that  year  the 
Turkish  powder  magazine  inside  the  Parthenon  was  exploded  by 
a  well-directed  bomb  from  a  mortar  managed  by  a  German  lieu- 
tenant in  the  Venetian  service.  After  remaining  practically  in- 
tact for  over  twenty-one  centuries  it  has  been  a  ruin  for  slightly 
over  two  centuries.     So  modern  is  the  loss  ! 

Directly  after  the  cannonade,  which  resulted  in  a  temporary 
occupation  of  Athens,  the  Venetian  commander,  Morosini,  tried 
to  take  down  and  carry  off  the  quadriga  of  Athena,  but  it  fell 
and  was  broken  into  small  bits.3  In  the  time  of  the  artist  before 
mentioned  ten  heads  still  survived  on  the  figures  of  the  west 
gable,  and  several  on  the  figures  of  the  east  gable,  including  two 
of  the  "Moirai."  *  From  the  beauty  of  the  bodies  we  can  see 
the  irreparable  loss  sustained  in  the  disappearance  of  the  heads. 

East  Gable.  —  We  are  not  left  entirely  in  the  dark  as  to  the  cen- 
tral figures  of  the  east  gable.  On  a  puteal,  or  well-curb,  in  Madrid,' 
there  is  a  reproduction  of  the  scene,  which  makes  it  quite  <  [ear 
that  Athena  was  not  represented  in  the  act  of  springing  from  the 
bead  of  Zeus,  as  was  the  case  on  black-figured  vases.  The  mo- 
ment after  the  birth  was  chosen.     Any  attempt  to  represent  the 

1  Spon  n.n-1  Wheler  in  1676,  taking  the  west  end  for  tin-  original  front, 

ma<le,  or  triol  to  make,  the  gable  Inures  represent  tin-  I. nth  ol  Athena. 

2  &  li  of  the  anonymoui  draftsman  on  p.  182. 

8  A  Venetian  officer  ■ccompanying  the  expedition  wrote  In  a  letter, 
4c  si  rappero  d<  .  ma  ■!  disfecero  in  polvere'   (It  was   not  a 

broken,  it  was  ground  to  powder). 

lap  al  the  ri^ht,  next  to  the  chariot  on  that  side. 
Pam  mi  /  1  2,  j<>o,  Fig.  26. 


178 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


actual  birth  must  have  been  more  or  less  grotesque.1  The  moment 
before  the  birth  would  have  left  out  the  chief  personage  in  the  scene. 
On  the  puteal  Zeus  is  seated  turned  towards  the  right.  In  front  of 
him  and  of  equal  size  is  Athena,  full  armed,  rushing  away  from  him, 
but  with  her  face  turned  to  the  front,  while  Nike,  a  diminutive 
figure,  hovers  aloft,  in  the  act  of  placing  a  wreath  on  Athena's 

head.  Hephaistos, 
behind  Zeus,  hold- 
ing a  double-edged 
ax,  is  starting  back 
at  the  sight  of  the 
wondrous  birth.2 

Confining  our- 
selves to  the  extant 
figures,  and  begin- 
ning with  the  left- 
hand  corner,  we  see 
Helios  with  his  four 

horses    rising    from 
FIG.  So-called  Theseus.     (British  Museum.)         the       ^       rushing 

upon  the  scene,  the  abode  of  the  gods,  and  ushering  in  the  great 
day  of  Athena's  birth.  It  takes  all  the  strength  of  his  powerful 
arms  to  restrain  his  fiery  steeds.  Directly  in  front  of  them  reclines 
a  powerful  figure  (Fig.  79)  in  godlike  ease  on  a  rock,  covered 
with  the  skin  of  an  animal  and  over  that  a  cloth.  Sauer  has 
shown  that  this  figure  was  turned  almost  to  the  front,  so  that 
the  left  elbow  touched  the  gable  wall.     It  has  long  been  called 

1  Kekul£,  Jahrb.  5  (1890),  186,  Ueber  die  Darstellung  der  Erschaffung 
der  Eva,  shows  how  art  instinctively  shunned  representing  the  moment  of 
birth. 

2  Sauer's  study  (Ath.  Mitt.  16  (1891),  59,  PL  3,)  of  the  marks  and  bed- 
dings of  the  figures  has  revealed  the  fact  that  Zeus  and  Athena  with  Nike 
between  them,  fastened  aloft  to  the  background  of  the  gable,  formed  the 
central  group.  Hephaistos  was  not,  as  on  the  puteal,  behind  Zeus,  but  to 
the  right  of  Athena.  Behind  Zeus,  matching  Hephaistos,  was  probably 
Apollo. 


THK    I'll  I  II    (T.N  1TKV  179 

''Theseus,"  and  since  other  names  as  Olympos,  Dionysos,  and 
Kephalos  are  not  convincing,  we  may  keep  the  time-honoured 
name,  although  it  be  incorrect.  It  is  the  only  figure  in  either 
gable  with  a  head,  battered,  indeed,  but  godlike. 

Next,  to  the  right,  are  two  seated  female  figures  beautifully 
draped,  long  railed  Demeter  and  Kore.1  The  former,  seated 
on  a  rather  low  structure,  is  more  matronly,  and  the  other  reclines 
upon  her.  Since  at  the  other  end  of  the  gable  we  seem  to  be 
dealing  with  cosmic  powers,  it  may  be  well  to  give  these  two  fig- 
ures the  name  Horai.     The  younger  stretches  her  raised  left  arm 


00.       Oroup  of  so-called  Three  Sisters.     (British   Museum.) 

in  the  direction  of  the  ascending  line  of  the  gable  towards  a  figure 
rushing  towards  her  from  the  centre.  Sim  e  she  shows  maidenly 
proportions,  she  has  been  thought  to  be  Iris,  the  messenger  who 
comes  to  convey  to  those  more  remote  the  news  of  the  gnat 
t  taking  pla<  e  at  the  1  entre.  These  three  figures  wear  the 
len  Dori<  peplos,  which  on  [ris  is  swept  backward  by  her 
swift  flight. 

Eleven  figures  .it  the  centre  are  supposed  to  be  lost.     We  may 

me    that    they   were   the    l>e>t,    bd  mioiig    them    weir    the 

'  Hrunn-llruckmaim,  No,    I 


180  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

great  Olympian  gods.  The  figures  on  the  puteal  are,  of  course, 
only  feeble  echoes  of  the  originals.  Beyond  this  gap  are  three 
female  figures  (Fig.  80)  which  the  world  can  never  cease  to 
admire.  One  wonders  what  heads  could  be  adequate  to  such 
splendid  bodies.  The  first  of  the  adorable  three  sits  upon  a 
rather  high  seat  and  is  turned  slightly  away  from  the  others  and 
toward  the  glories  of  the  central  scene.  She  seems  in  the  act  of 
rising  to  go  toward  it.  Of  the  other  two  the  one  nearer  the  cen- 
tre is  seated  on  a  chair  and  supports  the  next  one,  who  is  reclining 
in  godlike  ease  on  a  long  couch.  Of  her  it  may  be  said  that  her 
clinging  drapery  of  thin  and  almost  veil-like  texture  is  meant 
to  reveal  rather  than  conceal  the  glorious  form  within.  The 
garment  has  slipped  down  from  her  right  shoulder  with  telling 
effect.  These  immortal  women  are  elevated  far  above  the  fine 
creations  of  the  fourth  century.  It  is  here  that  we  feel  that 
Pheidias,  for  it  is  impossible  to  ascribe  these  three  figures  to 
a  lesser  sculptor  than  he,  simply  incorporated  in  marble  the  god- 
like forms  that  he  saw  in  a  vision.  There  is  no  certainty  as  to 
their  names.  From  the  rippling  nature  of  the  drapery  it  has  been 
proposed  to  call  the  reclining  figure  "  Thalassa,  resting  on  the 
lap  of  Ge."  But  since  the  three  figures  form  a  group,  it  is  bet- 
ter to  call  them  the  Moirai,  cosmic  powers.  The  maker  of  the 
Madrid  puteal  brought  in  the  three  Moirai  with  the  regular  attri- 
butes of  Klotho,  Lachesis,  and  Atropos.  He  probably  adapted 
them  from  these  Parthenon  figures,  which  perhaps  bore  the  same 
attributes. 

A  draped  figure  in  the  Berlin  Museum  in  the  exquisite  folds 
of  the  garment  and  dignity  of  posture  is  so  exceedingly  like  this 
reclining  Moira  that  we  must  with  Kekule 1  admit  that  it  came 
from  the  same  studio  as  the  figures  of  the  pediment.  The  same 
nobility  wraps  it  around.  It  is  not  improbably  an  Aphrodite 
Ourania,  and  an  original. 

Continuing,  beyond  this  group  is  another  quadriga  with  a 
female  driver,  whose  torso  is  preserved.     Sauer  has  discovered 

1  Jahrbuch  (Anzeiger)  (1893),  74. 


THE    FIFTH    CEN  11  K\ 


1S1 


traces  of  four  horses.  One  of  the  heads  is  perfectly  preserved 
.Si).  It  stretched  outward  and  downward  over  the  hori- 
zontal cornice  with  wide-open  mouth.  Goethe  admired  this 
head,  which  he  called  that  of  the  Ur-Pferd.  The  driver  of 
the  chariot  should  perhaps  be  called  Nyx,  since  in  the  fifth  cen- 
tury H.C.  Selene  was 
usually  represented  on 
horseback.  The  day 
of  Athena's  birth  was 
a  day  of  the  gods. 
bounded  by  morning 
and  evening. 

In  this  gable,  as  in 
the  western,  the  central 
re,  which  had  such 
prominence  at  Aej 
and  Olympia,  is  aban- 
doned. The  stereo- 
typed  responsion  of 
figures  in  opposite  halves  of  the  gable  is  also  designedly  broken 
up.  "Theseus"  and  the  two  Horai  balance  in  a  way  the  three 
Moirai.  But  "Theseus,"  a  single  male  figure,  is  made  really 
to  balance  the  two  outermost  Moirai,  while  the  other  Moira 
is  left  to  balance  the  two  Horai  of  the  left  side.  A  new 
method  has  come  in,  amounting  to  a  revolution.  In  surveying 
the  gables  of  Olympia  and  Acgina  the  eye  glides  rapidly  up  one 
slope    ind    down  the  Other,  without   delay,  feeling  the  sameness  of 

both  rides.  But  the  moment  one  tries  to  do  this  in  the  Par- 
thenon gable  one  receives  a  check.  We  proceed  from  the  corner 
to  the  centri  eries  of  wave-like  advani  es.     We  are  <  ompelled 

top  and  reflect.     I  o,  the  master  mind  of  Pheidias  is  felt. 

It  i^.  of  course,  impossible  that  Pheidias  with  his  numerous  other 
duties  could  have  carved  all  the  gable  figures;  but  that  he  in- 
■  1  them,  made  the  sketches  perhaps,  is  quite  likely.    The 
bntish  Museum  has  do  choicei  tr<  than  these  sculptures 


FlG.  8i.  —  Horse's  Head  from  E£ast  (iablc  of  the 

Parthenon.     (British  Museum.) 


182 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


M 


--.  1 


1    ** 


\nv  3 


from  the  east  gable,  left  from  the  wreck 
of  the  once  glorious  whole. 

West  Gable.  —  The  west  gable  (Fig.  82) 
according  to  custom  presented  a  less 
exalted  theme  than  the  other ;  but  in  the 
early  drawings  it  appears  to  be  much  better 
preserved.  It  is  clear  that  the  centre  was 
occupied  by  Athena  and  Poseidon,  with 
their  chariots,  drivers,  and  attendants. 
Athena  had  Nike  as  charioteer;  Poseidon 
had  Amphitrite.  Beside  the  chariots  were 
Hermes,  on  the  side  of  Athena,  and  Iris, 
on  the  side  of  Poseidon.  The  god  and 
goddess  have  arrived  at  the  same  moment 
to  take  possession  of  Athens.  Each 
appears  to  recoil  slightly,  perhaps  not  so 
much  from  enmity  as  in  wonder  at  the 
sight  of  the  other's  token  of  possession. 
Athena  brought  the  gift  of  the  olive  tree, 
which  was  a  KTrj/Aa  es  da;  Poseidon  smote 
the  Akropolis  rock  with  his  trident  and 
produced  a  salt  spring,  a  useless  miracle.1 
He  was  provided  with  a  habitation  in  the 
Erechtheion,  but  Athena  was  in  control 
of  the  city.  It  was  a  case  of  the  triumph 
of  mind  over  physical  force. 

1  On  a  vase  from  Kertch,  in  the  Crimea,  Posei- 
don  appears  attacking  the  olive  tree.  J.H.S.  3 
(1882),  245.  Dionysos  also  rushes  on  the  scene 
as  if  to  join  in  a  tight.  Nike  hovering  in  the 
boughs  of  an  olive  tree  crowns  Athena,  which  is 
here  a  distinct  affront  to  Poseidon.  On  coins 
of  Athens  we  seem  to  see  the  same  antagonism. 
A  group  of  Athena  and  Poseidon  on  the  north 
side  of  the  Parthenon  may  have  been  responsible 
for  the  introduction  of  this  hostile  feature. 


THE    FIFTH    CENTURY  183 

The  interpretation  of  the  minor  figures  to  the  right  and  left 
varies  widely.  The  two  corner  figures,  being  interpreted  as  Ilissos, 
on  the  south  end,  and  Kephissos,  on  the  north,  on  account,  for- 
sooth, of  the  liquid  flow  o(  their  forms,  led  to  the  interpretation  of 
the  other  figures  as  parts  of  a  physical  geography  map  of  Attika. 
A  more  rational  interpretation  seems  to  be  that  of  Furtwangler,1 
who  finds  on  the  left  Kekrops  and  his  family,  closely  associated 
with  Athena,  and  on  the  right  Erechtheus  and  his  family.  This 
is  particularly  clear  in  the  case  of  Erechtheus,  inasmuch  as  Erech- 
theus was  only  an  epithet  of  Poseidon  or  his  double.  Toward 
the  left  end  of  the  gable  we  have  Kekrops  leaning  against  his 
favourite  daughter.  Pandrosos,  who  throws  her  arm  around  him, 
the  only  group  still  remaining  on  either  gable.  Kekrops  is  iden- 
tified by  the  huge  coil  of  a  serpent  not  attached  to  him  but 
serving  as  a  sort  of  cushion.2  On  the  other  side  behind  Posei- 
don's  1  hariot  appears  a  woman  with  two  small  children,  who 
may  be  interpreted  as  Oreithvia  and  her  sons  Kalais  and  Zetes. 
It  may  not  be  possible  to  identify  every  figure  with  certainty. 
The  corner  figures  will  hardly  retain  their  current  names  by  virtue 
of  their  liquidity. 

It  is  reasonably  certain  that  the  powerful  torso  sometimes  iden- 
tified with  Hephaistos  of  the  east  gable  is  really  Poseidon  of  the 
le.'  The  beautiful  I.aborde  head1  may  have  had  its  place 
in  one  or  the  other  of  the  gables,  probably  in  the  western,  since  it 
brought  to  Venice  b;  mini's  secretary,  San  ( iallo.      It  is 

ibly  the  head  of  Nike,  Athena's  charioteer.  Unfortunately 
the  restoration  of  nose  and  chin  has  dulled  the  original  charm  of 

the 

1  Masttrpu 

'-'  I  '.■  1  .i  i  |i  ng  bore  the  sobriquet  "f  Hadrian  ami  Sabina.  The  other  t w . • 
ilaun  11  :   II  !-•,  111 1 )  be  identified  with  tome  probability  in 

irly  'Irau  in^. 

!a'l.in^  from  the  breast  in  the  British  Museum  has  recently 
luuri'l  in  Athens  and  attached  to  the  cast  sent  t"  Athens  tr..in  the  British 


1 84  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

The  Frieze.  —  The  famous  Parthenon  frieze,  sculptured  in  low 
relief,  had  a  length  of  about  520  feet.  On  this  band,  only  3^  feet 
wide,  were  carved  358  human  figures  besides  masses  of  horses  and 
animals  for  sacrifice.  This  was  a  representation  of  the  famous 
Panathenaic  procession  in  which  every  four  years  Athens  made  a 
great  parade  of  her  beauty  and  her  chivalry,  all  in  honour  of 
Athena. 

At  first  sight  this  masterpiece  seems  placed  where  it  could 
hardly  be  seen.  If  the  spectator  wished  an  uninterrupted  view  of 
it,  he  must  come  inside  the  colonnade ;  then  he  had  to  look  up  at 
it  from  a  point  not  more  than  8  feet  away  from  the  cella  wall, 
and  33  feet  below  it.  If  one  had  been  obliged  to  view  the 
metopes  at  a  like  angle,  they  would  have  appeared  like  a  mass  of 
protruding  knobs.  Even  for  this  low  relief,  although  there  was 
not  so  much  interference  of  one  part  with  another,  the  more 
favourable  view  was  secured  from  outside  the  colonnade,  where,  if 
one  viewed  the  procession  walking  backward,  it  would  seem  to 
him  to  be  moving  forward.  In  one  point  the  lighting  was 
admirably  adapted  to  low  relief.  The  architrave  came  down  about 
5  feet  below  the  lower  edge  of  the  frieze,  which  made  the  light 
come  from  below,  powerfully  reinforced  by  reflected  light  from 
the  marble  pavement.  There  were  no  shadows  below  the  sharp 
edges  and  projections.  The  lower  edges  of  the  figures  were  care- 
fully modelled,  while  the  upper  contours  sloped  gently  into  the 
background  or  were  cut  in  sharply  as  occasion  demanded.  What- 
ever shadows  the  heads  cast  caused  no  disturbance.  The  relief 
was  distinct  because  one  part  of  the  surface  did  not  get  into 
another  part's  way.  While  the  face  of  this  relief  generally  leans 
gently  forward  toward  the  spectator,  the  relief  elevation  even  at 
the  top  is  not  more  than  z\  inches  from  the  background.  Within 
this  limit  as  to  depth,  six  horses  and  riders  are  presented,  over- 
lapping one  another  in  close  array  in  a  space  of  perhaps  10  feet. 
The  contour  of  the  front  horse  and  rider  is  sharply  cut,  but  behind 
it  the  surface  slopes  quickly  into  the  background,  so  that  another 
figure  behind  has  also  a  sharp  outline ;   and  when  we  do  not 


THE    111' II I    CENTUR\ 


1S5 


scnitinize  too  closely,  each  member  of  the  group  of  six  seems  to 
have  body. 

The  procession  is  represented  on  the  Parthenon  virtually  in 
duplicate,  in  spite  of  certain  variations  the  north  frieze  and  the 
south  are  to  be  looked  at  as  two  sides  of  the  same  procession,  the 
whole  breadth  of  the  Parthenon  being  eliminated.  On  the  east 
front  we  see  two  similar  processions  coming  around  each  corner 
and  <  onverging  on  a  central  group.  On  the  west  end  a  schematic 
arrangement  was  avoided.      A  less  skilful  artist  might    have   made 


Fig.  83.— Parthem  tl  nd.     (In  situ.) 


the  symmetry  complete  by  having  the  procession  starl  from  the 
ind  proceed  to  the  right  and  left  ;  but  that  would  have 
mad    -        recessions.     And  when  the  actual  procession,  having 
tuched    from    the  Propylaea,    1  lUght    sight    of   its    miniature 
>le  dividing,  it  would  have  felt  a  disturbing  effe<  t. 
This  w  is  avoided  by  giving  up  the  whole  west  end  to  prepara- 
tion, which,  ho  lally  took  place  in  the  city.     Although 
the  movement  is  in  general  to  the  left,  giving  the  impression  that 
the  1           de  on  the  north  side  is  being  reinfon  ed,  there  is  still 


i86 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


trouble  and  confusion.  Near  the  right  end  a  horse  is  rearing  and 
trying  to  go  around  the  south  corner,  a  hint  that  something  is  hap- 
pening on  the  south  side.  At  the  very  end  one  of  the  marshals 
who  are  distributed  throughout  the  procession  is  adjusting  his 
mantle.  A  little  farther  to  the  north  there  is  trouble  with  another 
horse  with  an  abnormally  long  neck  (Fig.  83),  which  did  not  appear 
so  when  seen  from  below.  He  is  restive,  and  two  men  seem  to  be 
having  an  altercation  over  him.    The  dismounted  rider  seems  angry. 


FlG.  84.  —  Horse  and  Man  on  West  Frieze  of  the  Parthenon.     (In  situ.) 

A  boy x  behind  seems,  like  the  marshal,  to  be  pointing  to  something 
wrong  with  the  horse.  Then  come  for  the  first  time  mounted 
men  galloping  by  couples.  Near  the  middle  there  is  another  stop- 
page. An  angry  old  man  whose  garment  nutters  in  the  breeze  is 
beating  his  horse  (Fig.  84) ?     After  still  another  altercation  there 

1  This  boy  is  one  of  several  cases  where  the  heads  do  not  come  up  to  the 
level  of  the  other  heads.  This  is  one  of  the  few  exceptions  to  the  law  of  iso- 
kephaly  by  which  all  the  heads,  whether  of  seated  or  standing  or  mounted 
figures,  are  on  the  same  level.     The  principle  avoids  vacant  spaces. 

2  By  exception  this  horse  and  rider  fill  a  whole  slab.  The  rider's  head  was 
broken  off  in  the  earthquake  of  1894.  He  was  one  of  the  finest  figures  on  the 
whole  frieze. 


THE    FIFTH    CEN  ITJRY  187 

is  alternate  galloping  and  stopping  looking  backward,  and  ad- 
justing harness  once  present  in  bronze.  The  rider  who  has 
reached  the  extreme  left  turns  to  see  how  the  procession  is 
coining  on.  and  is  probably  adjusting  a  wreath.  A  marshal,  cut 
on  the  end  of  a  block  that  nas  its  long  side  facing  north,  seems  to 
ulatingto  the  serried  ranks  around  the  comer. 

There  is  endless  variety  in  dress:  here  a  fine  plumed  helmet 
and  cuirass,  here  a  cap  with  a  leather  (lap  behind,  here  a  broad- 
brimmed  hat.  Most  riders  are  bareheaded,  perhaps  having  garlands 
in  bronze.  Shoes,  which  two  have  stopped  to  tie,  are  seen  along 
with  top-boots  with  flaps  hanging  down.  Old  and  young  are  min- 
gled together.  Many  motives  appearing  here  for  the  first  time 
are  repeated  in  later  sculpture,  eg.  the  sandal-binder  "Jason"1  and 
the  horse  and  man  of  Monte  Cavallo.2  The  beauty  of  some  of 
these  youthful  riders,  especially  those  with  faces  bent  downward, 
has  a  touch  of  pathos.  The  splendid  horses,  of  which  the  best  is 
the  one  being  beaten  by  his  master,  furnished  the  text  for  Victor 
Cherbuliez'  Le  Cheval  de  Phidias} 

When  the  procession  is  fairly  started,  we  see  the  Knights,  of 
whom  Athens  was  so  proud,  filling  over  half  the  long  sides;  and 
still  more  spa.  e  is  taken  up  by  chariots,  carrying  sometimes,  be- 
-  a  driver,  an  apobates,  who  jumped  off  the  chariot  and  then 
remounted  it  in  its  swift  (light.  Here,  also,  is  grace  and  beauty, 
wherever  the  preservation  allows  it  to  be  seen.  In  front  of  the 
chariots  on  either  side  is  a  group  of  old  men,  called  thallophoroi, 
'•  palm-bearers,"  winners  in  a  contest  of  manliness  and  dignity, 
"  general  excellence,"  we  might  say.  Seven  of  the  group  from  the 
north  side  are  fairly  well  \> reserved.  The  corresponding  group  on 
'runn-lirm  kmann,  No.  67;    \ '"ii  Ma>  h,  238*7. 

•  Reinai  h,  Rlpt  rtoire,  i.  485,  4  and  5;   Von  Mai  h,  1. 

I    :•  ■    b  practically  all  that  remain*  on  the   Parthenon.     A 

stai^a  1  the  purpose  "f  replacing  poor  architrave  blocki  afforded, 

opportunity  t.>  itudy  thi  For  th 

uist  turn  t..  the  British  Museum.    The  mosl  complete  illustrations  arc 

l>y   Michaelia,   Der    Parthenon^  ari'l    Murray,    The   Sculpture*  oj  the 


188  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

the  south  side  depends  for  its  heads  on  our  unknown  draftsman, 
who  makes  some  of  these  prize  men  appear  like  dignified  Church 
elders  and  others  like  sots.  He  at  least  makes  it  sure  that  we 
are  dealing  with  male  figures.1 

From  this  point  to  the  end  of  the  long  sides  a  slight  variety  is 
introduced.  On  the  south  are  cows  led  and  driven  to  the  sacrifice, 
some  of  them  as  splendid  in  their  way  as  the  horses.  On  the 
north  side  there  appear  musicians,  bearers  of  platters  and  heavy 
jars,2  a  few  sheep  and  very  few  cows,  supposed  to  be  tribute  from 
the  cities  of  the  Athenian  confederacy. 

On  turning  the  corners  the  processions  become  again  symmet- 
rical. Here  are  the  modest  and  beautiful  maidens  of  Athens 
"  pacing  with  downward  eyelids  pure."  Preceding  these  on  either 
side  is  a  group  of  men  in  whom  we  may  perhaps  recognize  the 
archons,  although  the  number  does  not  tally  with  the  number  nine, 
or  more  probably  the  eponymous  heroes  of  the  ten  Attic  tribes. 
These  figures,  especially  the  foremost  one  on  either  side,  turn 
their  backs  to  the  group  of  gods,  on  whom  the  procession  seems 
to  have  converged.  They  would  hardly  take  such  nonchalant 
attitudes  if  the  great  gods  were  not  conceived  of  as  placed  on  an 
arriere-plan,  perhaps  inside  the  temple.  The  gods  are  separated 
into  two  groups  of  six  each,  with  Iris  and  Eros  added,  the 
former  as  the  attendant  of  Hera,  the  latter  of  Aphrodite.  Some  of 
the  divinities  are  easily  recognized.  There  is  practical  if  not  ab- 
solute agreement  in  regard  to  their  names.  Zeus  was  marked  by 
his  arm-chair  and  Athena  as  the  maiden  goddess.3  Perhaps 
the  best  naming  is  :  on  the  right,  Athena,  Hephaistos,  Poseidon, 
Apollo,  Artemis,  Aphrodite  ;  on  the  left,  Zeus,  Hera,  Ares,  Demeter, 
Dionysos,  Hermes.4     There  is  a  striking  resemblance  in  this  group 

1  All  this  part  was  nearly  annihilated  by  the  great  explosion  of  1687. 

2  The  weight  of  these  jars,  probably  filled  with  oil,  is  so  great  that  one 
stalwart  youth  has  set  down  his  jar  to  get  a  better  hold. 

8  There  were  probably  many  attributes  now  lost. 

4  We  can  absolutely  identify  Zeus,  Hera,  and  Hermes  on  the  left,  and 
Athena  and  Aphrodite  on  the  right.     The  latter  has  unfortunately  been  lost. 


llli:    FIFTH   CENTURY 


1S9 


to  the  seated  divinities  on  the  frieze  of  the  Treasury  of  the  Knidians 
(p.  98)  at  Delphi,  which  was  considerably  older. 

B  :tween  the  tsvo  groups  of  divinities  and   directly  over  the  en- 
trance into  the  temple,  where  we  should  expect  the  most  important 

scene   of  all,   is   a       

p  which  is 
difficult  to  explain. 
A  bearded  man1  to 
the  right,  behind 
Athena's    back,    is 

-:ng  a  square 
and  apparently 
thick  cloth  to  a 
boy  who  reaches 
up  to  take  it. 
Here,  if  anywhere 
on  the  frieze,  is 
the  famous  peplos, 
u  ■■  (veil  and  em- 
broidered by  selected  maidens,  being  presented  to  Athena's  priest 
to  be  transmitted  to  Athena  herself.-  If  the  priest  is  really  taking 
it,  the  boy  seems  to  be  giving  it  an  upward  shove.  Some  have  felt 
forced  to  regard  the  scene  as  showing  the  priest  laying  aside  his 
bimation  to  perform  the  sacrifice.  With  her  back  turned  to  the 
priest's  bat  k  is  a  woman,  probably  the  priestess  of  Athena,  who  is 
about  to  take  a  <  hair  from  a  maiden  who  had  it  poised  on  her 
head.     Another  maiden  bring  ond  chair.     Arc  the  actors  in 

the  solemn  ritual  going  to  sit  like   the  gods,   <>r   have  the  maid'  qs 


;.  85. —  Poseidon,  Apollo,  and  Artemis  from  the 
Parthenon.     (Athens,  Akropolis  Museum.) 


The'1  I  (lab    Fig.  85  ,  containing  Poseidon,  Apollo,  and  Artemis, 

fell  early, and  ws  I  up  and  protected, 

kmann, 

llv  brought  t"  tin-  ah.  ienl  image  "i~ 
na  in  thi   Ere  htheion  need  not  trouble  us.    The  intention  of  Pheidias 
ari'l  I  ,  time-honoured  image  into  the 

Pari  1 1  .'  ilii-.  w  a-.  not  don 


190  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

brought  chairs  that  turn  out  to  be  supernumerary,  the  gods  being 
now  all  seated?  Furtwangler's  explanation1  seems  reasonable. 
This  scene  also,  he  thinks,  takes  place  in  the  interior  of  the  temple. 
The  extra  chairs  brought  in  the  procession  are  not  needed,  although 
they  do  suggest  that  other  gods  might  have  come. 

In  the  frieze  we  see  none  of  the  archaic  features  that  appeared 
in  the  metopes.  Here  is  absolute  mastery  of  expression.  In  view 
of  the  almost  total  destruction  of  the  gable  figures  we  turn  to  these 
small  figures  for  our  knowledge  of  what  Pheidian  art  could  ex- 
press. Pheidias  must  have  been  the  creator  of  this  multitude 
of  figures,  belonging  to  this  world,  and  to  the  joyous  age  of  it. 
If  we  were  dependent  on  the  frieze  alone  for  our  judgement  of 
him,  we  should  still  put  him  at  the  head  of  all  sculptors.  The 
effect  on  the  spectator  is  not  unlike  that  produced  by  a  glorious 
symphony.  A  pictorial  element  pervading  it  corroborates  the 
statement  that  Pheidias  was  a  painter  before  he  became  a 
sculptor. 

Other  Architectural  Sculptures  of  the  Fifth  Century 

The  diminutive  temple  18  x  27  feet,  officially  called  the 
Temple  of  Athena  Nike,  stood  on  the  buttress  in  which  the  great 
southern  wall  of  the  Akropolis  ends,  until  shortly  before  the  Venetian 
bombardment.  Wheler,  who,  with  his  companion  Spon,  in  1676 
was  allowed  but  a  hasty  visit  to  the  Akropolis,  noted  in  passing 
it,  "  the  Architrave  hath  on  it  a  basso  relievo  of  little  figures  well 
cut.2"  When  Chandler,  more  than  a  century  later,  saw  no  such 
temple  he  impugned  Wheler's  veracity.  But  Wheler  was  honest. 
Shortly  after  his  visit  the  Turks  broadened  a  wall  that  already 
ran  from  the  Nike  bastion  to  the  Agrippa  pedestal,  in  order  to 
mount  cannon  upon  it ;  and  for  this  purpose  they  tore  down  the 
temple  and  used  it  with  other  material.  After  Greece  had 
achieved  its  independence  this  wall  was  broken  up,  and  in  1836 

1  Alasterpieces,  427. 

2  The  fact  that  Wheler  placed  the  figures  on  the  architrave  shows  the  hasty 
and  superficial  character  of  his  observations. 


nil.    FIFTH    *  EN  II  KV  191 

the  temple  was  rebuilt  on  its  old  place,  the  very  few  pieces 
lacking  being  supplied  It  is  very  doubtful  whether  the  "small 
figures  well  cut "  suffered  or  gained  by  this  long  buriaL  In  the 
meantime  the  busy  Elgin  had  pulled  out  of  the  face  of  the  wall 

looking  towards  the  Propylaea  four  blocks  of  the  frieze,  which  are 
n.»w  in  the  British  Museum.     These  were  replaced  on  the  temple 
i  terra  cotta,1  which  look  very  sombre  in  contrast  to 
the  marble. 

The  relief  band  was  only  a  foot  and  a  half  high.  Not  a  head 
remains  uninjured,  and  most  head.-,  are  larking  altogether.  Vet  we 
still  observe  in  these  figures  the  grand  style  of  the  fifth  century. 
On  three  sides  a  fierce  battle  is  raging  between  Greeks  and  Per- 
sians, the  latter  often  mounted  and  distinguished  from  Greeks  by 
trousers.  Several  of  them  are  dead  or  dying.  There  is  one  case 
of  a  charioteer,  evidently  a  Creek,  who  has  clearly  been  fighting 
on  the  Persian  side,  but  is  in  the  act  of  fleeing  with  his  chariot 
around  the  northwest  corner  to  reach  the  west  end.  On  this 
whole  west  end  we  see  a  fierce  infantry  fight  of  Creeks  against 
Greeks.  While  the  relief  has  been  interpreted  as  representing 
the  Persian  War  in  general,  here  we  seem  to  see  specifically  the 
battle  of  Plataea.  It  was  at  Plataea  that  Creek  met  Creek  in 
stubborn  fight.  The  Boeotians,  whom,  according  to  Herodotos, 
only  the  Athenian-  dared  to  (mi\  were  also  more  dreaded  antago- 
than  the  Persians.  Boeotian  helmets  on  this  end  seem  to 
i  orroborate  the  suggestion  that  PI  ttaea  was  spe<  ifically  in  the  mind 
of  the  sculptor.  \<  cordingly  the  gorgeously  dressed  rider  on  the 
last  b!o<  k  to  the  left  on  the  south  side,  who  is  being  dragged  from 
his  horse,  has  been  interpreted  as  Masistios,  the  Persian  cavalry 
commander,  whose  death  was  the  turning  point  in  the  battle.-' 

1  Tl  ■■  in  all  twelve  blocks,  four  on  each  long  aide  and  two  on  each 

end.  re  1-  ^t  ;   iix  are  now  on  the  temple.  -  only  the 

rn-l  nf  th<-  tirst  block  on  the  north  ride,  which  is  lost.  The  south  ride  is 
complete  but  I  !.    r<  king  or  replaced  in  terra  cotta. 

th  ride  maj  belong  to  the  north  si.k-. 


192  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

On  the  front  side  is  an  assembly  of  gods,  in  whose  presence 
the  battle  is  joined.  It  is  quite  clear  that  Athena  is  at  the  centre 
standing,  and  marked  by  her  shield.  To  the  right  is  Zeus,  marked 
as  such  by  his  arm-chair,  as  on  the  Parthenon  frieze  ;  to  the  left  is 
Poseidon  sitting  on  a  rock.  Some  other  figures *  may  be  identi- 
fied, but  not  with  so  much  certainty.2 

When  the  Nike  temple  was  first  restored  and  studied,  it  was 
maintained  that  it  was  a  building  of  the  times  of  Kimon,  shortly 
after  the  battle  on  the  Eurymedon,  a  decade  or  more  before  450 
B.C.  The  sculptures  were  forced  to  agree  with  that  date.  But 
they  were  subsequently  put  later  and  later,  until  Furtwangler  as- 
signed them  to  425  B.C.,  when  Athens  had  occasion  to  celebrate 
the  great  victory  of  Demosthenes  in  the  battle  near  Amphilochian 
Argos.3 

But  in  1897  there  was  found  on  the  north  slope  of  the  Akropolis 
an  inscribed  block  containing  an  archon's  name  and  a  decree  that 
a  temple  of  Athena  Nike  should  be  built.4  Kabbadias  believed 
that  the  character  of  the  letters  and  the  name  of  the  archon 
seemed  to  point  to  450  B.C.  as  the  date  of  the  temple,  which 
thus  appeared  to  have  been  considerably  older  than  the  Parthenon. 
But  the  opinion  that  it  already  stood  on  its  bastion  before  Mnesi- 
kles  had  conceived  his  plan  of  the  Propylaea  has  been  rejected 
by  most  scholars. 

To  pass  around  this  temple,  perched  on  its  high  bastion,  was 
dangerous ;  and  to  avoid  disaster  a  balustrade  about  three  feet 
high  was  made,  enclosing  the  temple.  It  followed  the  edge  of 
the   bastion  on  the  north,  west,  and  south  sides,  and  probably 

1  There  are  twenty-four  in  all,  and  a  few  more  were  cut  on  the  end  of  the 
block  on  the  north  side,  now  lost. 

2B.  Sauer,  Gottergericht  iiber  Asia  unci  Hellas  (in  Aus  der  Anomia,  1890), 
presents  the  fanciful  explanation  that  Greece,  a  woman,  is  here  accused  by 
Asia,  and  that  the  Greek  gods  are  assembled  to  judge  the  case.  Why  should 
Asia  bring  a  suit  at  all,  and  before  Greek  gods  ? 

3  Masterpieces,  443. 

4  Ephem.  Arch.  (1897),  173;   cp.  A.J.A.  3  (1899),  130. 


THK    I  II  111    (  I A  I'L'KV 


»93 


returned  to  the  front  steps  of  the  temple.  There  may  have  been 
a  plain  balustrade  from  the  beginning;  but  the  one  of  which  we 
have  sculptural  remains  evidently  belonged  to  a  date  near  the 
end  of  the  fifth  century.  When  it  fell  outward  from  its  high  posi- 
tion it  was  badly  broken.  By  a  slow  process  of  collecting,  enough 
of  it  has  been  brought  together  in  the  Akropolis  Museum  toconvey 
an  idea  of  the  exquisite  beauty  of 
the  whole.  It  consisted  for  the 
most  part  of  winged  Nike-  either 
setting  up  trophies  or  leading  cows 
to  the  sacrifii  e.1  Perhaps  the 
choicest  figure  of  all,  and  certainly 
the  general  favourite,  is  the  Nike, 
who  in  full  flight  reaches  down  to 
adjust  a  strap  of  a  sandal  on  her 
foot  which  she  raises  for  a  brief  in- 
stant (Fig.  86).  The  contortion  of 
her  body,  revealed  rather  than  con- 
cealed, brings  to  prominence  the 
exquisite  beauty  of  her  form."  An- 
other Nike  labouring  to  erect  a 
trophy  is  more  akin  in  spirit  to  the 
Parthenon  Moira.  She  is  grand  ; 
she  does  not  invite  attention,  but  is 
intent  on   her  work.     There  is  also 

a  fine  group  of  two  Nikes  struggling  with  a  cow  that  the)'  are 
Ling  to  the  sacrifice.  Not  one  of  these  four  has  its  head.  Hut 
they  are  the  choii  est  part  of  the  balustrade  that  is  left  us.  The 
few  beads  that  are  preserved  are  hardly  worth  mentioning;  but 
the  bodies  show  a  kinship  with  the  Parthenon  figures,  with  which 
one  almost  involuntarily  compares  them. 

1  K.  Kckulc,  Reliefs  an  </"•  Balu  trade  der  Athena  Nikt. 

•  While  ilii->  display  i-.  not  much  greater  than  in  the  reclining  Moira  of 
ill--  Parthetx  ,  ill'--  latter  ii  so  august  that  one  hardly  thinly  d  hei 

corporeal 


F10.  86. — Sandal-binder  from  Bal- 
ustrade of  the  1  emple  "I  Nike. 
(Athens,  Akropoh-  Museum.) 


i94  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

The  Theseion.  Metopes  and  Frieze.  — The  custom  of  calling  this 
temple  the  Theseion  still  prevails,  although  none  of  the  modern 
authorities  believe  that  it  has  any  right  to  the  name,1  because  there 
is  no  agreement  as  to  any  other  name.  The  temple  is  of  moderate 
size,  and  owes  its  excellent  preservation  to  the  fact  that  it  was  early 
converted  into  a  church  of  St.  George.  Its  sculptural  decorations 
are  eighteen  metopes,  and  two  bands  of  frieze  in  Parian  marble  and 
in  high  relief,  one  on  each  end  of  the  cella.  The  ten  metopes  on 
the  front  (east  end)  present  nine  of  the  labours  of  Herakles.  One 
scene,  the  fight  with  Geryon,  fills  two  metopes,  a  feature  that  seems 
to  occur  on  the  east  metopes  of  the  Parthenon.  The  Stymphalian 
Birds  and  Augean  Stables  are  left  out,  as  perhaps  not  appealing  to 
the  fancy  of  the  sculptor.  The  Cretan  Bull  was  omitted,  presum- 
ably because  Theseus  appeared  struggling  with  the  Marathonian 
Bull  on  a  metope  just  around  the  corner.  The  Attic  hero  could 
not,  of  course,  be  slighted  here,  and  his  deeds  occupy  the  four 
easternmost  metopes  of  the  north  and  south  sides.2  The  four 
on  the  south  side  have  suffered  more  from  the  fact  that  there  was 
more  room  there  for  people  to  congregate.  Of  those  on  the  north 
side  the  best  is  the.  wrestling  match  between  Theseus  and  Ker- 
kyon,  in  which  the  muscular  strain  of  both  figures  is  finely  por- 
trayed. Both  this  metope  and  that  of  Theseus  pitching  Skiron 
into  the  sea  have  each  a  head  preserved.  But  for  its  battered  con- 
dition the  struggle  of  Theseus  with  the  Marathonian  Bull  on  the 
south  side  would  perhaps  be  the  best  of  all.  The  bull  is  rearing, 
with  his  fore  legs  in  air,  but  his  head  down  between  them. 
Theseus,  wearing  a  fine  thin  mantle,  grasps  the  bull's  horn  with  his 
left  hand,  while  with  his  right  he  is  evidently  pulling  the  bull's 
head  backward  and  downward  with  a  cord.  The  intense  strain 
that  appears  in  the  similar  metope  from  Olympia  is  absent,  for 

1  The  bones  of  Theseus,  when  brought  from  Skyros  by  Kimon  in  469  B.C., 
were  probably  deposited  in  an  aedicula  farther  north  and  in  the  heart  of  the 
city. 

2  It  has  been  suggested  that  the  remaining  metopes  may  have  been 
painted. 


THE    FIFTH   CENTURY  195 

lure  Theseu  sily  master.     A  convenient  rock  affords  a  sup- 

port for  his  right  foot,  while  his  left  knee  is  pressed  against  the 
bull's  hea(L  The  metopes  of  this  temple  show  quite  as  wide  a 
divergence  in  style  as  those  o(  the  Parthenon. 

The  frieze  is  in  high  relief,  and  docs  not  encircle  the  cella,  like 
the  Parthenon  frieze.  It  consists  of  two  bands,  one  at  each  end. 
The  band  at  the  eastern  end,  however,  does  not  stop  with  the  cella, 
but  is  continued  to  the  outer  colonnades.  The  west  frieze  con- 
tains twenty  figures,  and  represents  a  battle  of  Centaurs  and 
Lapiths,  arranged  for  the  most  part  in  groups  of  two  figures  with 
three  single  figures  interspersed.  It  is  about  what  a  group  of 
Parthenon  metopes  would  be  if  the  triglyphs  were  eliminated. 
Many  attitudes  of  the  Parthenon  metopes  are  repeated  with  strik- 
ing similarity.  Near  the  middle,  two  rearing  Centaurs  are  drop- 
ping a  rock  upon  the  head  of  Kaineus,  the  Lapith  chief,  marked 
by  a  fine  1  uirass,  and  sinking  him  into  the  earth.  Intense  a<  tion, 
almost  fury,  pervades  the  scene.  Several  Lapiths  have  shields 
and  helmets,  which  show  that  we  are  not  dealing  with  a  casual  dis- 
turbance of  a  feast,  but  with  a  war  to  the  death.  The  contorted 
attitude  of  a  Centaur  thrown  over  on  his  back  near  the  left  end, 
and  a  spear  like  the  mast  of  a  ship,  which  another  wields,  show 
this. 

I  <:,  the  east  frieze,  which  is  longer  and  contains  thirty  figures 
(one  apparently  lost),  where  from  the  example  of  the  Parthenon 
and  the  Nike  temple  we  might  expect  a  quiet  scene,  an  equally 
fieri'-  battle  rages  in  the  middle.  Stones  of  great  size  are  being 
hurled    by   nade   men,    two   of    whom    are    fallen   upon   the   rocks. 

nt  1.  as  betits  architectural  propriety,  a  restful  scene  is 
introduced.     <  >n  the  left  are  probably  Athena,  Hera,  and  Zeus ; ' 
on  the  right,  with  lessi  ertainty,  Poseidon,  I  )e meter,  and  Dionj 
11    the  extr<  ft  beyond  Athena  one  of  the  combatants  is  being 

bound.     Balani  ing  this  group  a  trophy  is  being  de<  ked  out  on  the 
•.    The  participants  here  are  all  Greeks.     No  heads  are  pre- 

1  I  livinitin  ii  worthy  of  comparison  with  that  ol  the 

I  wlnlc  thej  are  imall  they  >li"«  tin-  gi  ind  ityl< ■. 


i96  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

served  on  this  east  frieze.  How  different  is  its  composition  and 
effect  from  the  quiet  east  friezes  of  the  Parthenon  and  the  Nike 
temple  ! 

These  sculptures  are  our  main  criteria  for  dating  the  temple. 
From  these  it  seems  to  be  later,  but  not  much  later  than  the  Par- 
thenon. Dorpfeld  reinforces  this  conclusion  by  architectural  feat- 
ures,1 in  which  an  increasing  Ionicizing  tendency  is  apparent  from 
the  Parthenon  through  the  Theseion  to  the  temple  at  Sunion. 
These  considerations  more  than  outweigh  the  fact  that  Parian 
marble  in  ornamental  sculpture  was  generally  discarded  at  Athens 
after  the  erection  of  the  Parthenon. 

In  recent  times  B.  Sauer 2  has  published  his  studies  on  the 
Theseion  in  a  folio  volume  with  fine  plates,  on  which  he  restores 
the  gable  groups  of  the  temple  from  cuttings  remaining  on  the 
horizontal  cornices.  On  this  rather  precarious  foundation  he  has 
established  his  thesis  that  the  east  gable  contained  the  birth  of 
Erichthonios,  in  which  Athena  is  the  central  figure,  with  a  daughter 
of  Kekrops  on  either  side.  On  the  left  of  this  group  was  Ge  hold- 
ing Erichthonios,  and  to  the  right  Kekrops  himself.  In  the  west 
gable  the  central  group  is  made  to  consist  of  Hephaistos  on  the 
left,  approaching  the  nymphs,  Thetis  and  Eurynome.3  On  either 
side,  in  the  corners,  are  quadrigas  of  Helios  on  the  right  and  Nyx 
on  the  left.  Thus  Hephaistos  dominates  the  west  gable  in  a 
measure ;  but  not  quite  as  does  Athena  the  east  gable.  On  the 
basis  of  these  studies  Sauer  names  the  temple  the  Hephaisteion  ; 
and  while  the  name  cannot  yet  be  regarded  as  universally  adopted, 
it  has  achieved  considerable  popularity.4  It  is  to  be  noted  that 
Athena  and  Hephaistos  sit  side  by  side  on  the  Parthenon  frieze, 

1  Ath.  Mitt.  9  (1884),  336. 

2  Das  Sogenannte  Theseion  und  sein  Plastischer  Schmuck,  1899. 
8  Homer,  //.  18.  398. 

4  Dorpfeld  long  ago  proposed  this  name  in  his  open-air  lectures  in 
Athens.  Reisch,  Robert,  Amelung,  Six,  and  others  accepted  it.  No  other 
name  at  present  enjoys  so  much  favour.  —  It  is  on  a  wonderfully  slender  basis 
that  Sauer  assigns  the  lost  sculptures  to  Amphion  of  Knossos,  of  the  school 
of  Kritios. 


THK    FIFTH    CENTl  RY 


197 


and  that  they  were  both  patrons  of  handicraft ;  but  Sauer's  pro- 
posal gives  Hephaistos  a  distinctly  subordinate  place.  How  does 
he  know  whether  we  are  not  dealing 
with  another  Athena  temple? 

The  Erechtheion.  — ■  The  Erech- 
theion,  which  comes  next  in  chrono- 
logical order  among  the  buildings  at 
Athens  adorned  with  sculpture,  was 
next  to  the  Parthenon  the  most  im- 
portant of  the  buildings  of  the  great 
age  of  sculpture,  and  seems  to  have 
usurped  in  Athenian  religion  the  plat  e 
which  Perikles  intended  for  the  Par- 
thenon. We  must  pass  over  its  ex- 
quisite Ionic  an  hitecture,  surpassing 
in  delicacy  that  of  every  either  (ireek 
structure.  Its  frieze  of  figures  in  high 
relief  pinned  to  a  background  of  black 
I  leusinian  stone  must  also  be  passed 
over,  since  its  small  fragments  h 
little  importance  as  works  of  art.  But 
the  Porch  of  Maidens1  has  furnished 
us  figures  which,  though  they  are  archi- 
tural  supports,  are  yet  among  the 
finest  sculptures  now  left  to  us  from 
the  great  period  (Fig.  87).  It  was  a 
Ixild  step  to  make  Use  ot'a  human  figure 

as  an  architectural   support.     It    had 

been  tried  before,  as  al  Delphi  in  the  Treasuries  of  the  Siphnians 


ih 


87.  —  Karyatid  from  the 
Erechtheion. 

(  British  Musrum.) 


1  Yitruvii.s    1 .  1.  5    1-  responsible  foi  the  itati  ment  thai  the  people  of  Karyai 
in  I  led  with  the  Persians,  and  thai  the  Greeks  punished  them  by 

making  their  women  burden  bearers  in  man)  cities;   and  thai  architects  used 
imitations  of  thesi  n  ;is  architectural  supports.     From  tlii^  passage  of 

Yitruvius  the  name  "  Karyatid  "  was  1  enturies  ago  applied  to  the  maidens  of  the 
!       bthcion,  although  tin-  only  name  for  them  .it  Athens  »as  "tin-  Maid<  ni  " 


198  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

and  the  Knidians.  Compared  with  the  Maidens  of  the  Erech- 
theion  those  figures  are  very  archaic.  The  burdens  of  the  latter 
were  not  heavy,  as  was  the  case  with  the  Atlantes  at  Akragas. 
The  Maidens  could  bear  the  light  entablature  without  being 
pressed  down  by  it.  The  neck,  the  weakest  point  in  the  support, 
was  strengthened  by  a  mass  of  hair  falling  down  the  back.  To 
add  also  to  the  appearance  of  stability  the  three  Maidens  on 
either  side  had  the  inner  leg  bent,  while  the  outer  one  was 
stiffened.  They  were  represented  as  standing  still.  The  folds  of 
the  chiton  on  the  bearing  side  have  the  appearance  of  the  flutes 
of  an  Ionic  column.  They  stand  four  in  the  front  line  and  one 
each  behind  the  end  figures. 

They  were  guardians  of  the  tomb  of  Kekrops,  and  they  were 
worthy  of  their  high  office.  Of  all  the  figures  made  in  imitation 
of  them  not  one  has  kept  the  high  spirit  of  the  original.  It  was 
a  pity  that  they  were  ever  separated.  Elgin  carried  one  to  the 
British  Museum  for  safe-keeping,  a  terra-cotta  substitute  taking  its 
place.  Another  was  shattered  by  Turks  or  Greeks ;  and  the  other 
four  have  suffered  considerable  abrasion.  But  after  the  destruction 
of  so  much  of  Greek  statuary  they  stand  out  as  most  magnificent 
creations  of  the  mind  and  heart  of  Athens.  We  do  not  know  their 
exact  date.  But  in  409  B.C.,  when  work  on  the  temple,  begun  long 
before  and  interrupted  by  the  war,  was  taken  up  again,  we  find  the 
Maidens  already  in  place.  It  is  wonderful  that  the  Athenians  in 
the  throes  of  that  war  and  afterwards,  began,  continued,  and  fin- 
ished the  Erechtheion.  If  all  else  in  Greek  sculpture  were  de- 
stroyed, the  Maiden  in  the  British  Museum,  though  separated  from 
her  sisters,  would  testify  to  the  finesse,  as  well  as  to  the  nobility, 
of  the  ancient  Greeks. 

The  Frieze  of  the  Temple  at  Bassai.  —  During  the  Peloponnesian 
War  Attic  art  invaded  the  Peloponnesos.  Attic  artists  were  not 
always  scrupulous  as  to  whether  their  patrons  were  political  friends 
or  enemies.  When  there  was  trouble  at  home,  they  sought  work 
abroad.  On  the  occasion  of  a  plague,  either  in  430  B.C.  or  more 
probably  ten  years  later,  Phigaleia,  wishing  to  show  gratitude  to 


I  111     FIFTH    CENTl  KY  [99 

Apollo  Epikourios  for  having  spared  the  city,  built  over  and  around 
a  small  ancient  shrine  in  a  place  called  Bassai,  "  the  Glens,"  about 
four  miles  distant  from  the  town,  a  fine  large  temple  that  should  do 
honour  to  the  god.     Iktinos,  one  of  the  architects  of  the  Parthenon, 

supervised  the  work.  It  is  not  improbable  that  he  brought  with 
him  Attic  sculptors  as  well  as  builders.  In  fact  there  is  in  these 
sculptures  so  much  similarity  to  the  Athenian  sculptures  just  de- 
scribed that  it  is  fair  to  assume  their  Attic  origin. 

d'he  small  and  very  ancient  temple  already  existing  wis  incor- 
porated into  the  new  one,  which,  made  like  it ^  predecessor  of 
local  grey  stone,  extended  across  it  to  the  north,  and  faced  in 
that  direction  ;  an  exceptional  feature,  for  temples  usually  faced  to 
the  east.1  This  great  addition  to  the  north  was  really  an  open 
court,  giving  probably  the  first  example  of  a  hypaethral  temple. 
But  this  court  was  virtually  only  an  appendage  to  the  temple 
proper,  the  ancient  shrine.  Over  the  pronaos  which  faced  north- 
ward were  metopes  of  which  only  fragments  remain,  but  from 
these  fragments  they  are  declared  to  be  finer  than  the  frieze. 
The  latter  was  part  of  the  entablature,  which  extruded  around 
all  four  sides  of  the  open  court  and  was  supported  by  a  series 
of  short  walls  projecting  inward  from  the  cella  wall  and  ending 
in  half  columns.  The  thin  frie/.e  slabs,  which  rested  on  the 
.  were  held  in  place  by  dowels  which  ran  back  into 
len  beams.  Holes  in  the  slabs  make  this  certain. 
From  a  point  inside  the  open  space  the  frieze  could  be  viewed 
as  a  whole,  while  the  usual  position  of  a  frieze  makes  the  spe<  I 

round  all  four  sides  of  the  building.  Practically  the  whole  of 
this  frieze  was  found  by  Cockerel!  and  his  companions  in  1811, 
and  thr<  later  was  acquired  for  the  British  Museum.     Both 

frieze  and  metopes  were  "i  Doliana  marble.  <  m  the  friezes  of 
the  fifth  century  nitherto  described  the  scenes  lap  over  more  or 

lit  and  left,  but  hei  h  slab  is  (  om- 

plete  m  itself,  a  feature  that  baa  disadvantages  for  the  propel 

1  The  ground  mi  here  10  am  ven  that  th<  aid  do!  \\<  11  < 

i"  tin-  1 


200 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


rangement  of  the  whole.  In  fact  this  is  really  unattainable.  Two 
subjects  are  here  portrayed,  an  Amazon  battle  and  the  old  theme 
of  a  fight  between  Lapiths  and  Centaurs.  To  each  subject  a  long 
and  a  short  side  was  given,  except  that  the  Amazons  occupied 
one  plaque  of  the  long  side  which  belonged  to  the  Centaur  and 
Lapith  group. 

We  have  already  seen,  on  the  friezes  of  the  Nike  temple  and 
the  Theseion,  examples  of  intense  action,  but  here  the  intensity, 
both  in  fury  and  in  pathos,  is  much  greater,  and  points  to  a  decline. 
Among  those  slabs  that  carry  the  fight  to  a  fury  are  two  belong- 


FlG.  88.  —  Amazon  Relief  from  Phigaleia.     (British  Museum.) 


ing  to  the  Amazonomachy,  on  one  of  which  (Fig.  88)  a  Greek  on 
the  left,  with  an  abnormally  long  left  leg,  is  dragging  away  an  Ama- 
zon by  the  ear,  while  she  braces  herself  against  him  with  her  right 
arm  and  leg.  On  the  same  slab  is  another  full-breasted  Amazon 
and  a  Greek,  each  with  a  shield,  rushing  upon  each  other  with 
fierce  intensity.  The  Greek,  bent  forward  to  the  attack,  looks  both 
fierce  and  wary,  while  the  Amazon  is  only  fierce.  Her  legs  spread 
wide  apart  make  curious  horizontal  folds  in  her  garment  from  thigh 
to  thigh.  On  this,  as  on  other  slabs,  drapery  is  distributed  liber- 
ally, but  in  no  very  rational  order.     On  another  slab  (Fig.  89)  an 


nil:   FIFTH   CEN  rURY 


201 


Amazon  is  riding  in  from  the  left  on  a  horse  like  those  of  the  Par- 
thenon frieze,  trampling  down  a  man  with  a  fc/,  who  is  perhaps  the 
(  ause  of  her  apparent  rebound.  In  the  middle  is  an  Amazon  with 
a  closely  fitting  helmet  without  a  plume,  attacking  a  man  with  a 
lion's  skin,  generally  called  Theseus.1  Both  recoil,  Theseus  prob- 
ably in  order  to  deliver  a  death  blow.  Then  to  the  right,  on  the 
end.  i>  an  Am  ;  •  mi  falling  dead  or  d\  ing  from  her  horse,  which  also 
down.      \  youthful  Greek,  with  a  look  thai  seems  to  express 


BiitishMuseui 


pity,  seizes  her  by  the  shoulder  and  one  foot;  but  she  has  passed 
beyond  harm  or  pity. 

In    the  Centaur    fights  we    see  the  invulnerable    Kaineus  with 
helmet  and  shield  as  on   the    Theseion,  still    defending    himself, 
though   overborne    and  pressed  into  the  earth  by  two  Centaurs 
ring  above  him  in  pyramidal  form.     Greeks  standing  by  are 
poW(  o  extricate  him.      Around  the  oik-  next  to  him  on  tile- 

ry is  flying  in  strange  coils.      Still  another  scene  is  the 
!r<-me  of  all.      In  the  middle  is  a  <\ca>\  Centaur  with   legs, 

arms,  and  head  pressed  down  flat  to  the  rocky  ground  like  the 

archaic  Hull  on  the  Akiopolis  (p.  58),  while  .1  dog  is  biting  him  in 

the  net  k.     A  companion  Centaur,  leaping  ovei  him,  gives  a  vicious 

ki<  k  with  both   hind    legs   to  the  shield  which  ;i   Lapith  on  tin-  Idt 

holds  out  tor  protection.     The  living  Centaur  is  curiously  repre- 
\  similar  figure  on  anotbei  sl.ilj  probably  represents  Herakli 


202  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

sented  as  at  the  same  moment  engaged  in  a  fierce  fight  with  a 
Lapith  on  the  right  end  of  the  slab,  and  pressing  his  teeth  deep 
into  the  shoulder  of  the  Lapith  to  the  left,  who  has  found  time  to 
drive  his  two-edged  sword  nearly  to  the  hilt  into  the  vitals  of  the 
beast  who  has  fought  his  last  fight.  But  the  Lapith's  own  eyes 
seem  closed  in  death.  On  the  Parthenon  metopes  dead  Centaurs 
were  avoided  as  unaesthetic,  but  on  the  Bassai  temple  they  were 
displayed  in  their  utmost  ugliness. 

Pathos  is  here  carried  to  an  extreme.  One  woman  attacked  by 
a  Centaur  is  holding  a  babe,1  while  her  natural  protector  has  been 
thrust  down  to  the  ground  by  another  Centaur  to  the  right.  Most 
pathetic  of  all  is  the  scene  where  two  women  have  fled  to  a  shrine. 
This  being  invaded,  the  woman  to  the  left  extends  both  arms  in 
hopeless  agony  as  she  sees  her  companion,  with  her  arm  encir- 
cling the  sacred  image  itself,  laid  hold  of  by  the  unholy  Centaur, 
who  tears  away  her  garment  even  as  she  leans  against  the  image. 
This  figure  is  the  most  pathetic  and  most  beautiful  of  the  whole 
frieze.  In  the  hour  of  need  relief  comes  in  the  person  of  Herakles, 
who,  having  hung  up  his  lion's  skin  on  a  tree,  is  making  quick  work 
with  the  Centaur,  who  in  that  very  moment  was  gloating  over  his 
prey.2  On  another  slab  even  a  Centaur  seems  to  express  grief  at 
the  death  of  a  comrade.  In  general,  pathos  has  supplanted  the 
calmness  of  the  Parthenon  frieze. 

Since  1900  the  Greek  authorities  have  restored  the  temple, 
setting  up  fallen  columns  and  replacing  other  pieces,  making  a 
practical  and  judicious  restoration. 

Relief  from  Eleusis.  —  The  Age  of  Perikles,  in  spite  of  the  gen- 
eral submergence,  has  not  failed  to  leave  here  and  there  other  things 
of  beauty.  Two  reliefs  in  the  museums  of  Athens  deserve  to  take 
rank  with  the  relief  sculptures  of  the  Parthenon  :  the  large  relief 

1  The  breadth  of  her  hand  is  equal  to  the  length  of  the  babe's  thigh. 

2  Herakles'  knee  is  poorly  planted  on  the  Centaur,  and  looks  as  if  it  would 
slip  off.  But  the  Centaur  is  doubtless  doomed.  On  the  similar  Parthenon 
metope  the  knee  is  better  placed.  For  these  scenes,  see  Ancient  Marbles  in 
the  British  Museum,  4,  PI.  1-23,  and  Brunn-Bruckmann,  Nos.  86-91. 


THE    FIFTH    I  EN  HKY 


»©3 


from  Eleusis  (Fig.  90),  and  the  so-called  Mourning  Athena.     On 

the  relief  from  Eleusis,  now  in  the  National  Museum,  the  figures 
are  about  life-size.  Between  two  august  females  stands  a  youth, 
marked  as  su<  h  by  his  --in  iller  stature.  A  deep  religious  solemnity 
pervades     tin-     group, 

which  makes  the  relief 
comparable  t<>  an  altar- 
piece  in  a  cathedral. 

It  is  quite  clear  that 
a  holy  office  is  here 
being  performed  at  the 
holiest  spot  in  Attika. 
The  youth  is  Triptol- 
emos,  whom  "the  god- 
vain,"  I  )emeter 
and  Persephone,  are 
ordaining  for  the  mis- 
sion, to  give  tothe  world 
the  knowledge  of  agri- 
culture which  brought 
with  it  <  ivic  life.  We 
know  that  at  the  most 
solemn  moment  in  the 
Eleusinian  Mysteries  an 

ear  of  grain  wis  held 
up  in  silence  before  the 
initiated. 

'1 1)'  to  the  left,  resting  her  left  hand  on  a  sceptre,  i^  putting 

in,  one  e  represented  in  paint  or  in  bron/e,  with  her  right 

hand,  into  the  uplifted  hand  of  the  youth.    This  hand  i*  formed  to 
1  an  elongated  object  between  the  thumb  and  fingers.     The 
a  1  igi tst  fi|  hind  the  youth  is  in  the  at  tol  pressing  a  wreath  upon 

his  head  in  token  of  his  consecration  to  the  greal  mission  ol  1  on- 
vevr  ulture,  the  great  1  ivilizing  element,  into  the  wide  world. 

It  :  n  debated  which  of  the  two  goddi  Deraeter. 


1  1 


Kore. 


a. in  I ).  met.  1  .mil 
(Athens,  Nation. il  Museum.) 


204 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


One  might  suppose  that  it  is  she  who  puts  the  ear  of  grain  into 
Triptolemos'  hand.     But  Furtwangler  declares  that  at  this  period 

the  Doric  peplos  was 
the  invariable  garment 
for  maidens  when  maids 
and  matrons  appeared 
in  the  same  scene.1 
The  contrast  in  hair 
and  drapery  was  doubt- 
less of  set  purpose,  to 
avoid  monotony.  The 
boy's  openly  displayed 
nudity  is  another  ele- 
ment of  contrast.  Had 
we  found  only  the  right- 
hand  figure,  we  should 
have  been  inclined  to 
put  it  near  the  end  of 
the  fifth  century  B.C. ; 
but  the  schematic  hair 
of  the  boy  and  the  stiff 
folds  of  the  peplos  of 
the  goddess,  whom  we 
may  now  call  Perseph- 
one, incline  us  to 
give  this  glorious  stele 
a  date  earlier  than  the 
Parthenon  sculptures. 
While  the  kinship  of 
this  relief  to  the  Par- 
thenon frieze  is  evident,  the  solemnity  which  befits  the  solemn 
act  lifts  it  out  of  the  category  of  displays  of  "  beauty  and  chivalry  " 
into  the  realm  of  religion. 

1  The  torch  and  sceptre  would,  of  course,  be  natural  attributes  of  either 
goddess. 


Fig.  91. 


So-called  Mourning  Athena. 
Akropolis  Museum.) 


(Athens, 


II II.    I  11  111    i  I  \  rURY 


205 


The  So-called  Mourning  Athena.  —  A  charming,  but  less  important 
relief,  generally  railed  the  Mourning  Athena  (Fig.  91 ),  in  the  Akrop- 
olis  Museum,  leaped  into  popularity  .1-  soon  as  it  was  discovered. 
The  warrior  goddess  is  marked  as  such  by  her  spear  and  Corinthian 
helmet  with  a  crest,  although  the  aegis  is  lacking.  Her  Doric 
chiton  has  a  diplois  girt  at  the  waist  with  a  cord  The  chiton  dues 
nut  reach  to  the  ground, 
and  both  feet  are  displayed, 
the  left  on  tiptoe  throwing 
back  the  chiton  and  break- 
ing somewhat  the  columnar 
effert  seen  in  the  left  figure 
of  the  Eleusinian  relief  and 
in  the  Maidens  of  the 
Erechtheion. 

The  chief  interest  of  this 
figure  lies  in  its  attitude. 
The  goddess  leans  forward 
with  her  head  bent  down, 
her  forehead  almost  touch- 
ing the  raised  left  hand  that 
holds  the  spear.  The  right 
hand,  with  thumb  and 
fingers  spread  out,  rests 
upon  her  thigh.  She  seens 
leaning  somewh  it  wearily  1  in 
an  inverted  spe.tr.  which  has 
■  in'-  ••  reversed 
arms  "  and  mourning.      The 

block  on  which  the  goddess*  gaze  mthh  to  be  testing  has  been 

1  bj  some  u>  tele  on  which  Athena  contemplates  the 

names  of  the  dead  Athenian  hero...    From  this  attitude  the  figure 

been     called     the     Mourning     Athena.       But     the     tokens    ot 

mourning  arc  by  no  meai  in.     No  other  fifth-century  work 

shows  such         oti mental  attitude,  and  what  seems  conclusive  is 


FlG.  92. —  Perikles.     (British  Museum.) 


206 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


that  the  Greek  gods  were  not  supposed  to  be  "  touched  by  the 
feeling  of  our  infirmities."  Since  the  relief  was  found  on  the 
Akropolis,  it  can  hardly  be  funereal.  It  has  been  suggested  that 
since  Athena  is  not  in  position  to  see  the  names  cut  on  the 
supposed  stele,  she  may  be  leaning  over  a  battlement,  wrapt  in 
"  maiden  meditation  "  upon  her  favourite  city.     The  feeling  that 

there  is  here  sorrow  and  mourn- 
ing is,  however,  on  the  whole 
very  difficult  to  shake  off.1 

Bust  of  Perikles.  —  Two 
figures  in  the  round  of  the  period 
under  discussion  are  of  some 
interest.  By  good  fortune  we 
have  a  fine  copy  of  a  bust  of 
Perikles  (Fig.  92)  in  the  British 
Museum,  which,  though  only  a 
copy,  carries  the  conviction  that 
we  see  something  of  the  linea- 
ments of  "  the  great  Olympian," 
somewhat  cold  and  self-con- 
tained, who  ruled  Athens  by  the 
force  of  his  character,  and  who, 
if  he  had  lived,  might  have 
guided  her  to  victory.  The 
rather  sensual  mouth  is  domi- 
nated by  the  upper  part  of  the 
face,  which  is  intellectual  and 
forceful. 

Nike  of  Paionios.  — The  other 
figure  is  the  Nike  of  Paionios, 
at  Olympia  (Fig.  93).  While 
Paionios  has  properly  been  debarred  from  the  claim  of  having 
made  the  sculptures  of  the  eastern  gable  of  the  temple  of  Zeus 

1  For  an  attempted  explanation  of    the    pillar    see    Bennett,  A.J.A.   13, 
C I9°9)f  431  ff- 


Fig.  93. —  Nike  of  Paionios. 
(Olympia.) 


1111.    Ill  111    CENTURY  207 

at  Olympia,  he  has  a  valid  claim  to  the  authorship  of  this 
Nike.  Not  only  does  Pausanias  assign  it  to  him,  hut  Paionios 
took  «.are  that  his  name  .should  be  cut  on  the  high  triangular 
base  of  the  statue.  This  Nike  was  om  e  a  magnificent  figure 
"  sailing  through  the  azure  deeps  of  air."  Hut  the  loss  of  the 
face  has  left  us  only  a  delicate  maiden  body  now  descending 
gently  toward  the  ground,  still  supported  by  an  eagle  which 
flies  somewhat  crosswise  to  her  path.1  The  rapid  (light  throws 
hack  her  drapery  and  reveals  her  form.  The  statue  seems  later 
than  the  date  which  would  naturally  he  assigned  it,  424  B.C, 
and  is  a  trophy  of  the  check  given  to  Sparta,  the  ancient  enemy 
of  Messenia.  In  it  we  have  taken  a  step  toward  the  powerful  and 
august  Nike  of  Samothrake. 

The  so-called  Hcstia,-  in  the  Torlonia  Museum  in  Rome,  is  akin 
to  the  figure  of  a  woman  '  in  Copenhagen  with  a  rather  suspicious- 
.  aig  head.    One  readirj  iffinities  with  the  Olympia  figures, 

espec  iallv  with  Sterope  and  Hippodamia.  The  Hestia  shares  the 
columnar  character  of  these.  A  fleeing  woman  in  Copenhagen 
with  her  garment  strangely  spread  out  at  the  waist  also  belongs 
here.4     She  shares  the  Olympic  features. 

eral  other  female  figures  to  which  names  cannot  readily  he- 
assigned  show  the  development  of  draped  figures  after  the  time  of 
the  pediment  sculptures  of  Olympia.  The  figure  called  Hera  or 
ieter  has  been  terribly  battered  and  has  lost  both  arms  ;  hut 
the  drapery  and  the  full  form  betray  a  statue  of  the  fifth  century. 
Oth<  '  be  ini  luded  here,  although  they  do  not  have  the  flavour 

of  the  fifth  century.  The  I  [era,  or  "  Barberini  Juno,"''  in  the  \  ati<  an, 
when  patched  up,  makes  a  very  respectable  appearance.    The  dra- 

1  A  line  head  in  the  collection  "f  Mi-  II    Hertz  in  Rome  baa  been  recog- 
nized of  the  bead  <>f  this  statin-.      Sec     Unelung,  fid*.  Mitt.  9 
1.1  :      ..  •    vmpia,  III,  [88  1 
inn-P.rui  km. inn.  .    Von  Ma.  I:. 
*  Arndt,                            -Carisb,  1    . 

Mac  b,  105. 


208 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


pery  is  superb,  especially  where  it  clings,  as  if  moistened,  to  the  upper 
part  of  the  body.  The  face  has  suffered  comparatively  little  in  the 
adjusting  of  a  new  nose.  In  the  beautiful  Borghese  "Juno"1  in 
Copenhagen  we  find  less  of  divinity.  The  drapery  fallen  from  the 
neck,  but  still  clinging,  is  a  piece  of  virtuosity  which  marks  a  low- 
ering of  the  tone.  The 
lowering  of  divinity 
goes  on  in  the  famous 
Venus  Genetrix,2  with 
hands  restored,  which 
Furtwangler  regarded 
as  a  copy  oi  the  "  Aph- 
rodite in  the  Gardens," 
by  Alkamenes,  Phei- 
dias'  pupil,  "  a  statue 
world-renowned  and 
superior  to  all  other 
draped  statues  of  that 
goddess."3 

The  Athena  of  Vel- 
letri,4  with  a  stern  face 
and  her  helmet  tipped 
on  the  back  of  her 
head,  has  a  very  di- 
minutive aegis,  hung 
by  a  collar  made  of 
links  of  chains.  The 
Athena  Giustiniani5 
has  acquired  consider- 
able fame,  and  on  the 
.     On   the  whole  it   is 


Fig.  94.  —  Dexileos,  Grave  Relief. 
Dipylon.) 


(Athens, 


other   hand   has    been    much    disparaged 

1  Reinach,  Repertoire,  ii.  239.  8. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  473  ;  Von  Mach,  108. 

3  Furtwangler,  Roscher's  Mythologie,  i.  413. 

4  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  68  ;   Von  Mach,  107. 


5  Ibid.,  No.  200  ;    297. 


1  III.    FIFTH    CIA  11  RV 


209 


probablv    an    archaistic    figure.      Neither   this   nor   the  Velletri 
Athena  i>  very  stirring  *>r  admirable. 

Funeral  Monuments.  —  A  must  precious  relic  of  Athenian  sculp- 
ture is  the  series  of  exquisitely  beautiful  Attic  grave  reliefs,  which 
B  in  in  the  fifth  anil  continue  through  the  fourth  century.  The 
I  ■  iter  part  of  these 
reliefs  are  in  the  Na- 
tional Museum,  but 
some  of  the  choicest 
still  remain  in  the 
Dipylon  cemetery,  in 
the  northwestern  part 
of  the  ancient  city. 
Here  no  heartrending 
scenes  are  represented, 
but  the  dead  are  seen 
BS  when  they  were  alive 
and  pursuing  their  daily 
occupations.  Here  is 
the  hero  Dexileos,  a 
knight  on  horseback, 
smiting  down    his   an- 

:n>t  (Fig.  94). 
I  [ere  I  -  >,  IS  the  beauti- 
ful, aristocratic  lady, 
Hegeso    (Fig. 

ed  and  attiring 
herself  with  the  aid  of 

maid,  who  prcM-nts  to  her  a  jewel  box,  from  which  the  lady 
draws  some  adornment.  She  is  not  <!<•.  king  herself  for  death,  far 
from  it  j  th<  is  one  taken  from  a  happy  life  when  the  persons 

trayed  are  at  their  best  ami  happiest.     Vs  we  pass  through  the 

itiful  form-,  now  gathered  in  tin-  museum  we  almost  forget  that 

the)  Here    1-.   not    death,  but   simply   transition, 

t  a  sho.k  "in-  experiences  when  one  turns  from  grave  reliefs 


Fig.  95.- 


Hegeso,  Grave  Relief    (Athens, 
1  lipylon.) 


2IO 


GREEK  SCULPTURE 


of  the  fifth  and  fourth  centuries  to  a  modern  cemetery.  Well  did 
Goethe  say,  "  No  people  of  the  earth  has  so  sweetly  dreamed 
the  dream  of  life  as  the  Greeks." 

We  may,  without  absolutely  strict  chronology,  mention  further  a 
few  of  the  important  tombstones.1  In  a  prominent  place  stands 
the  stele  of  Demetria  and  Pamphile  over  life-size.     The  august 

forms  in  marble 
seem  to  weave  a 
spell  over  us.  The 
relief  of  Damasis- 
trate  contains  in 
high  relief  four  per- 
sons. But  she  gives 
the  name  to  the 
group.  This  is  a 
typical  representa- 
tive tombstone. 
Damasistrate, 
seated,  grasps  the 
right  hand  of  her 
husband.  It  is  a 
scene  of  separation 
in  this  world  or  re- 
union in  the  next. 
The  drooping  head 
of  the  standing 
woman  and  the  ap- 
parent grief  of  the  maidservant  might  incline  us  to  mark  it  as  a 
death  scene  —  a  long  separation.  The  beauty  of  the  seated 
woman  is  apparent  to  all.  There  is  another  relief  in  which  affec- 
tion is  equally  shown.  A  seated  woman  presses  forward  to  join 
her  friend  in  a  mutual  and  warm  embrace.  The  rather  stiff  form  to 
the  left  is  a  supernumerary.  The  clinging  drapery  is  to  be  noticed. 
A  relief  found  in  the  bed  of  the  Ilissos  is  peculiar.  A  youth  un- 
1  Percy  Gardner,  Sculptured  Tombs  of  Hellas. 


r 


Fig.  96.  —  Funereal  Relief  of  Father  and  Son. 
(Athens,  National  Museum.) 


THE    FIFTH   CEN  11  RV  .ml 

clothed  stands  looking  apparently  gloomily  into  space  (Fig.  96), 

and  we  seem  to  see  dejection  DOt  only  in  his  eye-,,  but  in  those 
of  the  old  man  beside  him.  Thus  we  see  the  Skopas  eye  in  both 
profile  and  in  front  view.  A  boy  behind  the  naked  youth  is 
crushed  with  grief.  The  <lo_;  with  a  long,  wolfdike  nose  mirks  the 
youth  as  a  hunter.  The  two,  doubtless  father  and  son,  were  set 
deeply  back  into  un  aedicula.  Both  this  fact  and  the  forms  of  the 
figures  indicate  that  we  have  come  far  down  into  the  fourth  cen- 
tury. Still  later  and  in  fact  entirely  within  the  aedicula  is  the 
warrior  Aristonautes  with  shield  and  helmet  in  another  relief. 
The  deep-sel  eye  is  a  prominent  feature. 

Asia  Minor.  — The  Attic  art  of  the  fifth  century  spread  out  over 
Asia  Minor,  leaving  trues  of  itself  in  Lycia,  and  especially  at 
Xanthos.  Works  of  both  the  fifth  and  fourth  centuries  are  notable, 
("lose  by  the  archaic  "Harpy  Tomb"  rose  a  monument  in  the 
form  of  a  temple,  perched  on  a  very  high  pedestal.  It  had  three 
bands  of  reliefs,  two  probably  on  the  pedestal,  the  other  serving 
as  the  regular  frieze  of  the  order.  A  number  of  large  statues 
were  distributed  among  the  columns.  Attic  influence  is  every- 
where evident.  A  -<  cue  from  the  lower  frieze,  representing  a 
Creek  fighting  with  two  Asiatics,1  is  strikingly  excellent  The 
scene  is  marked  with  pathos,  especially  so  in  the  case  of  the 
effeminate  Asiatic  on  his  bent  knees. 

The  reliefs  on  a   Herodn,  in  the  form  of  a  large  enclosure,  at 

1  in  the  ship-  region,  although  much  weatherworn  from  being 

in  soft  limestone,  belong  also  to  this  period.     One  is  irresistibly 

reminded   of  pictorial  art  where  the  figures  crowd  one  another  on 

canvas.  We  have  here  one  trie/'-  placed  directly  upon  another, 
the  adornment  seeming  overloaded.  The  inside- friezes  were  also 
iilv  applied.  The  figures  are  almost  innumerable,  and  form  a 
world  of  mythology,  a  good  deal  of  which  is  beyond  our  under- 
standing'. The  whole  has  been  transported  to  Vienna  and  forms  a 
museum  by  it  l 

1   !:■  'in.  No. 

mann,  />.is  Ji 


212  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

CHAPTER   IV 
THE   FOURTH   CENTURY 

Skopas 

One  would  hardly  have  supposed  that  after  the  disasters  of  the 
Peloponnesian  War,  which  shook  the  foundations  of  civic  life,  there 
would  succeed  another  period  of  bloom  in  art  almost  as  brilliant 
as  the  Age  of  Pheidias.  But  this  marvel  did  come  to  pass ;  and 
there  are  not  a  few  who  value  the  works  of  the  great  masters  of 
the  fourth  century  as  highly  as  those  that  have  been  left  to  us  from 
the  great  fifth  century.  Contemporaries  assigned  to  Praxiteles 
nearly,  if  not  quite,  as  high  a  place  in  sculpture  as  that  occupied  by 
Pheidias.  His  probably  somewhat  older  contemporary,  Skopas, 
was  less  lauded  in  antiquity ;  but  it  is  now  beyond  doubt  that  he 
was  a  genius  struggling  to  express  great  ideas,  and  that  his  works 
did  not  suffer  when  compared  with  those   of  Praxiteles. 

In  modern  times  up  to  1879,  in  spite  of  Urlichs'  book  on  Skopas, 
composed  from  literary  sources  and  guesswork,  little  was  known 
of  his  style.  The  most  important  fact  reported  of  him  was  that 
when  the  temple  of  Athena  Alea  at  Tegea  was  burned  down  in 
395-394  B.C.,  he  was  commissioned  to  supervise  the  building  of  a 
much  larger  temple  to  take  its  place.  Since  he  was  pre-eminently 
a  sculptor,  it  has  been  justly  assumed  that  the  sculptured  decora- 
tions of  the  new  temple  would  be  controlled  by  him  and  show  his 
style  at  least  to  the  same  degree  that  the  Parthenon  sculptures 
showed  the  style  or  the  spirit  of  Pheidias. 

Just  how  much  time  elapsed  between  the  destruction  of  the 
old  temple  and  the  building  of  the  new  we  do  not  know. 
Probably  the  time  was  short,  since  Tegea  had  not  suffered  much 
from  the  Peloponnesian  War.  We  do  know  that  the  new  temple 
was  built  of  marble  from  the  near  quarry  of  Doliana,  and  that 
it  called  forth  great  admiration.  Pausanias,  who  belonged  to  a 
generation  that  esteemed  marble  highly,  forgetting  the  temple  of 


THK    FOURTH    CENTURY  213 

Zeus  at  Olympia,  called  this  doubtless  brilliant  creation  "  the 
largest  temple  in  the  Peloponnesos. "  As  the  centuries  passed, 
this  temple  vanished  from  the  earth,  and  its  exact  situation  was 
unknown. 

In  1S79  Milchhofer  discovered,  on  or  near  what  proved  to  be 
the  site  of  the  temple,  two  heads1  of  Doliana  marble  which  a 
year  later  were  identified  by  Treu  '  as  belonging  to  this  building. 
They  also  clearly  belonged  to  a  gable,  since  they  were  cut  off 
obliquely  at  the  top,  and  must  have  been  so  treated  in  order  to 
mike  them  fit  the  oblique  line  of  a  gable.  To  make  this  conjec- 
ture certain  a  considerable  fragment  of  a  boar's  head  was  found. 
Pausanias  had  reported  that  the  east  front  1  "iitained  in  its  gable  a 
group  representing  the  kalydonian  Boar  Hunt,  in  which  the  boar 
a   prominent   figure.     Thus  we  have  the  certainty  that  these 

gments  came  from  one  or  the  other  of  the  two  gables. 

In  the  more  recent  excavations  at  Tegea  by  the  French  School 
at  Athens,  there  was  found  a  female  figure  in  Parian  marble 
which  may  be  Atalanta  herself,1  in  which  case,  since  she  was  prob- 
ably one  of  the  most  prominent  figures  of  the  gable,  Parian  marble 
fitting.  Furtwangler  has  advanced  the  view  that  all  the  fig- 
ures in  the  east  gable,  except  the  Hoar,  were  of  Parian  marble. 

The  'wo  male  heads  (  Fig.  >>~ )  were  at  on<  e  rei  ognized  as  dif- 
ferent from  any  Greek  heads  hitherto  known.     The  structure  of 
IcuU  is  unique,  and  differs  totally  from  the  head  of  the  Hermes 
of   Praxiteles,    which    had    been     found   only   a    (cw   vears   before. 

The  faces   are   short;    the  longest   diameter  of  the   head    is  a 

horizontal   line  from   the  forehead   to   the  back  of  the  skull,  which 

is  fiat  on  the  top,  compared  with  the  high  dome  of  the  skull  of 
Hermes.     The  whole  shape  of  the  two  heads  show-,   phys- 

ic  d  force.  Over  and  above  this  there  is  intensity  of  action. 
ihort  mouth  and  the  broad  nose  show  that.     But  it  is  the  1  ye 

that  contributes  most  to  this  intensity.     Here  on  cither  side  of 

the  broad  bridge  of  the  nose  the  inner  corners  of  the  eyes  are 

UK    Witt.  1    1879  .  1  -   trek,  Zeii,  |8    r8fi     . 

I  .     .    '         :ncr,y.//..S'.  .  Sj. 


214  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

sunken  deep  into  the  skull,  while  at  the  outer  ends  a  thick  pad  of 
flesh  comes  down  from  the  forehead,  forming  a  projection  under 
which  the  sharply  rising  lower  lid  disappears  from  sight.  In  a 
profile  view  the  eye  nearly  disappears.  The  whole  opening  of  the 
eye  is  fully  half  as  wide  as  the  length.     This  makes  an  expression 


Fig.  97.  —  Two  Skopasian  Heads  from  Tegea. 
(Athens,  National  Museum.) 

totally  different  from  the  mild,  dreamy  eyes  of  Praxiteles'  Hermes, 
where  the  breadth  is  only  a  third  of  the  length.  The  eye  is  also 
deeply  set  as  well  as  padded.  Sculpture  has  travelled  a  long  dis- 
tance since  the  pre- Persian  "  Maidens  "  of  the  Athenian  Akropolis 
appeared  with  eyes  on  the  surface  of  the  skull.  It  has  suddenly 
been  dowered  with  the  gifts  of  a  genius,  who  carved  out  a  way  of 
his  own.  Here  we  see  fierce  action  for  the  first  time  portrayed 
in  the  face ;  and  it  has  come  to  stay.  From  this  time  onward 
we  keep  meeting  the  "  Skopas  eye."  We  see  it  on  grave  monu- 
ments of  the  fourth  century  at  Athens,  on  the  friezes  of  the 
Mausoleum  ;  in  fact,  everywhere. 

It  is  a  strange  commentary  on  our  early  authorities  that  they 
failed  to  recognize  the  diametrically  opposite  tendencies  of  Skopas 
and  Praxiteles.     They  lacked  light,  because  they  were  dealing  with 


THE    FOURTH    CENTl  RY  215 

copies  ;  but  in  the  presence  of  .1  few  originals  wc  realize  the  blind- 
of  the  soi-disant  authorities.  Upon  the  discovery  of  the 
•an  heads  there  followed  immediately  an  enlargement  of  our 
knowledge  as  to  the  genuine  works  of  Skopas.  I'..  1'.  Benson1 
recognized  a  head  in  the  National  Museum  at  Athens  as  probably 
a  genuine  work  of  Skopas,  perhaps  an  Aphrodite. 

Botho  Graef1  discovered  in  two  similar  heads,  one  found  at 
Genzano,  now  in  the  British  Museum,  and  another  in  one  of  the 
palaces  on  the  Capitoline  hill,  a  marked  resemblance  to  the  heads 
from  regea,  now  in  the  National  Museum  at  Athens.  The  open 
mouth  in  these  heads  is  more  marked  than  in  the  battered  heads 
from  1  eg  I.  A  long  series  of  some  twenty  heads  in  various  mu- 
seums was  now  pointed  out  as  Skopasian.  The  two  which  had  first 
attracted  the  attention  of  Graef  he  recognized  as  copies  of  a  youth- 
ful Herakles  wearing  a  poplar  wreath.  The  abundance  of  replicas 
pointed  to  a  famous  original  This  wis  with  some  probability 
conjectured  to  be  the  fain  :ue  of  a  youthful   Herakles   in    the 

Gymnasium  at  Sikyon,  represented  on  coins  of  that  city." 

A  firm  bisis  now  laid,  it  required  only  the  application  of  a  care- 
ful test  for  the  admission  of  other  candidates  into  the  group. 
It  was  not  long  bet  in-  the  famous  Meleager*  in  Rome  was  recog- 
nized, without  a  dissenting  voii  m  excellent  representative  of 
Skopas.  <  »n  this  broad  and  firm  basis  several  other  candidates 
took  their  proper  place.  S  >me  of  the  older  and  famous  claimants 
unable  to  endure  the  test  and  war   shut  out      The   Ludovisi 

has  a  debal  ible  claim.  But  that  several  originals  are  ready 
to  be  admitted  is  beyond  all  doubt.  The  best  is  the  head  of  an 
august  goddess,  found  on  I  th  slope  of  the  Akropolis,  in  the 

Asklepieion   (I  This   head    lacks    none   of  the    Skopasian 

credentials.6    An  Asklepios  from  the  Peiraeus'  may  also  here  be 

1  /.//.. v  194.  •-'  Rom.  Mitt.  4  (  1889),  1 

*  A  Num.  1  ',">i>n.  I'l.  II  \i. 

»  ( itraef,  Rdm.  Mitt.  \  (1889),  21  mann,  N* 

II  kiiKiim,  \  M.i.  I),  2]  ;. 

llltM,  Ath.  Mitt.   I  7  .///;.   Mitt.   17      1  •   ,       .   IO. 


2l6 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


enrolled,  since  he  also  has  all  the  Skopasian  marks.  The  Athena 
in  the  Ufifizi  also,  according  to  Furtwangler,1  is  "  from  the  fiery 
genius  of  Skopas."  "The  goddess  is  conceived  somewhat  like  a 
Joan  of  Arc,  in  the  semblance  of  a  young,  still  undeveloped  girl  — 

vibrant  with  courage  and 
enthusiasm,  her  face  slightly 
upturned,  she  looks  out 
into  space." 

The  Niobe  group  in  Flor- 
ence, over  which  critics  used 
to  quarrel  as  to  whether  it 
was  the  work  of  Skopas  or 
of  Praxiteles,  is  now  gener- 
ally regarded  as  late  work 
or  a  copy  in  which  neither 
had  a  part  (see  p.  248). 

We  may  be  reasonably 
sure  that  Skopas,  who  came 
from  Paros,  and  worked  by 
preference  in  the  marble  of 
his  beloved  island,  had  a 
long  life.  Forty  years  after 
he  had  appeared  at  Tegea 
as  a  noted  sculptor,  we  see 
him  at  work  upon  the 
Mausoleum  of  Halikarnas- 
sos,  one  of  the  Seven  Wonders  of  the  World.  It  was  about  the 
middle  of  the  fourth  century  B.C.  when,  with  several  famous 
Athenian  sculptors,  he  undertook  the  decoration,  and  perhaps  the 
construction,  of  that  famous  tomb,  at  the  request  of  Artemisia,  the 
wife  and  sister  of  Mausolos,  one  of  the  kinglets  who  sprang  up  in 
the  territory  of  the  decaying  Persian  empire.  Doubtless  many 
stories  arose  in  connection  with  the  work.  One  was  to  the  effect 
that  the  love-sick  queen  died  of  grief  over  the  death  of  Mausolos 

1  Masterpieces,  305. 


Fig.  98.  —  Goddess  from  South  Slope  of 
Akropolis.     (Athens,  National  Museum.) 


THE    I  Ol'RTH    CEN  URV 


217 


before  the  tomb  was  completed,  and  that  the  artists  finished  it  at 
their  own  expense,  so  great  was  their  love  of  art.  There  is  noth- 
ing improbable  in  the  story  when  we  take  into  account  that  the 
work  may  have  at  that  time  been  already  nearly  completed.  The 
building  of  marble,  surmounted  by  the  colossal  figure  i)i  Mausolos, 
must  have  been  above  all  praise.  The  architect  was  Pythios.  In 
the  adornment  of  this  temple-tomb  Skopas  was  probably  the 
directing  mind.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  Leochares  and 
Bryaxis  were  comparatively  young  men,  while    Sko^is.  from    his 


FIG.  99.  — Piece  oi  Frieze  of  the  Mausoleum.    (British  Museum.) 

greater  age  and  experience,  was  the  leading  spirit.  Timotheos, 
who  had  seen  service  in  adorning  the  temple  of  Asklepios  at  Epi- 
dauros  with  sculptures,  was  probably  next  in  age  and  experience. 
Plin)  'says  that  these  four  sculptors  took  each  one  side  of  the  build- 
ing. But  so  far  as  we  can  judge  from  the  fragments  of  the  two 
friezes  that  retain  anything  intelligible,  there  is  no  great  diver- 
een  one  side  and  another.  It  1-,  certainly  more  probable 
that  each  sculptor  controlled  a  whole  frieze  than  that  he  collabo- 
rated on  all  the  Inez  Fiction  was  at  woik,  as  we  mav 
from  the  fact  that  Vitruvius1  mention,  Tiaxit-  let  in  In-,  list,  appar- 
ently making  him  a  substitute  fur  Timotheos. 

1  F'l       .   |6     >o  f.  '*  Vitiuvius,  5.  12. 


2l8 


GREEK  SCULPTURE 


The  "  frieze  of  the  order,"  of  which  enough  remains  to  give  an 
idea  of  the  style,  contains  admirable  figures  of  Greeks  fighting 
with  Amazons  (Fig.  99).  The  latter  are  beautiful  figures  —  too 
beautiful  to  be  called  viragos  —  who  are  striking  out  wildly  at  their 

male  antagonists  with 
no  hope  of  victory. 
One  of  them  seems  ex- 
ecuting a  tour  de  force, 
fighting  backward  on 
horseback.  From  the 
"  charioteer  frieze," x 
which  was  probably 
located  at  the  top  of 
the  high  base,  we  have 
one  driver  fairly  well 
preserved.  The  back- 
ward flow  of  the  long 
garment  is  admirable. 
The  driver,  who  looks 
like  a  woman,  is  prob- 
ably a  youth  with  a 
trailing  Ionic  garment. 
What  strikes  us  par- 
ticularly in  nearly  every 
head  on  all  the  pre- 
served figures  is  the 
"Skopas  eye,"  whether  in  action  or  in  passion.  The  spirit  of 
Skopas  seems  brooding  over  the  whole. 

While  sojourning  on  the  Ionic  shore  Skopas  may  well  have 
taken  time  to  carve  the  figures  on  some  of  the  drums  of  the  new 
Artemision  at  Ephesos,  near  at  hand,  in  356-333  B.C.  On  the 
drum,  fairly  well  preserved,  in  the  British  Museum  (Fig.  100) 
both  heads  that  survive,  Hermes  and  Thanatos,  have  the  Skopas 
eye. 

1  British  Museum,  Catalogue  of  Sculpture,  PI.  18. 


FlG.  100.  —  Sculptured  Drum  of  a  Column  from 
Temple  at  Ephesos.     (British  Museum.) 


1  Hi:    FOURTH   CENTl  1  \  219 

i'KWI  : 

We  now  turn  to  a  contemporary  ofSkopas,  a  typical  Athenian, 
a  Greek  sculptor,  better  known  than  any  other  except,  perhaps, 
Pheidias.  This  was  Praxiteles,  of  a  family  of  Athenian  sculptors. 
His  fame  rested  mainly  on  his  Eroi  ami  his  Satyr,  although  lie 

ght   many  other   :  a  hi.  h   at   one  time  seemed  to  over- 

shadow the  works  of  the  great  huh  century.  These  glorious  crea- 
tions were  lost  with  the  wreck  of  ancient  glory,  and  although  in  the 
multiplicity  of  replicas,  especially  of  his  Aphrodites,  as  well  as  of 
the  Satyr  and  tin-  Eros,  his  style  was  felt,  yet  there  was  no  certain 
original  from  his  hand  until  in  1 S 7 7 ,  at  Olympii,  the  Hermes  was 
found,  a  minor  piece,  it  is  true,  hut  genuine.  The  significance  of 
this  find  is  realized  when  we  recall  the  fact  that  it  was  believed 
that  no  one  of  the  great  Greek  sculptors,  Pheidias,  Myron,  Poly- 
kleito>.  Skopas,  Lysippos,  and  Praxiteles,  had  left  a  work  of  his  own 
hand.  The  world  hailed  and  beheld  with  wonder  this  one  solitary 
original  of  the  _'r>-  it  da)  S  of  sculpture.  But  that  this  I  [ermes  was 
to  Pausaniis,  at  least,  a  minor  work  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  he 
barely  mentions  it  in  pi>Mn_;  through  Olympia,  saying-  "A  stone 
Hermes,  and  he  bears  a  baby  Dionysos,  a  work  ol  Praxiteles." 
How  different   is  his  tone  when  he  comes  to   the    Kros  and    the 

r!      These  were   celebrities,  and   known  to  the  garrulous  trav- 
eller as  sik  h.      1  le  may  0<  >t  have  been  the  highest  judge  I  »f  art,  ami 

we  might  disable  his  judgement  were  it  not  for  the  consensus  of 
antiquity  which  passr>  by  the  I  [ermes  to  look  at  greater  splendours. 
We  almost  certainly  have  copies  of  some  of  the  most  famous 
of  Praxiteles' works.  Of  the  Eros  and  the  Satyr  this  is  beyond 
question;  but  just  how  near  the  copies  approach  the  great  orig- 
inals we  do  no1  know.  The  !  the  Vatican.1  called  from  its 
•  0!  ■!  I  El  ■-."  is  the  finest  of  all  ex- 
tant copies,  mainly  because  of  the  excellent  1  tion  of  the 
head.  We  therefore  take  it  as  the  best  representative  of  Praxit- 
eles' popular  statue.     The  copi<                                    I,  bad,  and 

•  37'J  J   V(  n  M.u  b.  1 


2  20 


GREEK  SCULPTURE 


indifferent ;  and  they  are  legion.  The  same  is  true  of  the  Satyr. 
The  copy  in  the  Capitoline  Museum,  found  in  Hadrian's  Villa  near 
Tivoli,  has  gained  world-wide  celebrity  in  part  through  Hawthorne's 
tale  of  "  the  Marble  Faun  "  (Fig.  101 ) .  In  it  we  have  an  excellent 
representation  of  a  being  almost  but  not  quite  human.     Its  almost 

perfect  preservation  puts  it  at  the 
head  of  all  the  copies.  A  torso  in 
the  Louvre  comes  from  what  seems 
to  have  been  a  more  excellent 
copy;  but  since  in  the  Capitoline 
copy,  the  Marble  Faun,  we  have 
the  head  with  its  curious  wild  but 
mischievous  face,  we  naturally  re- 
gard it  as  the  representative  of  the 
masterpiece.  It  is  something  to 
have  these  two  famous  master- 
pieces revealed  to  us  in  a  fairly 
satisfactory  manner  through  copies. 
We  know  from  an  anecdote  that 
Praxiteles  considered  these  two 
statues  to  have  been  his  best.  He 
had  promised  his  beloved  Phryne, 
so  the  story  goes,  that  he  would 
give  her  the  finest  of  all  his  statues, 
but  he  would  not  at  once  tell  her 
which  he  regarded  as  his  best. 
She  then  resorted  to  a  ruse,  mak- 
ing some  one  tell  Praxiteles  that  his 
atelier  was  on  fire.  The  sculptor 
in  agony  said,  "  If  my  Eros  and  my  Satyr  are  lost,  all  is  lost." 
Phryne  had  got  the  information  which  she  sought.  Which  one 
she  chose  is  immaterial.  The  whole  story  may  be  simply  ben 
trovato ;  but  it  indicates  that  these  two  stood  high  among  his 
works,  either  with  himself  or  with  his  patrons.  Thus  the  Eros 
and  the  Satyr  are  stamped  for  all  time  as  his  greatest  productions. 


Fig. 


ioi.  —  Marble  Faun.     (Rome, 
Capitoline  Museum.) 


THE    1  Ol  RTH    CEN  II  k\ 


221 


Hut  how  little  we  can  realise  from  the  copies  the  beauty  of  the 

originals  ! 

Praxiteles   inclined   to  gentleness,  exhibiting  an   antithesis  to 

Skupa-,  who  was  intense,  His  Hermes  has  the  high  arched 
skull,  while  Skopas'  heads  have 
their  longest  axis  from  front  to 
rear.  He  inclined  to  the  repre- 
sentation of  female  beauty,  but 
always  of  an  exalted  character, 
which  reached  its  culmination  in 
the  Aphrodite  of  Knidos.  of 
which  copies  enough  remain  for 
to  form  some  appreciation  of 
the  original.  It  is  said  that  he 
made    a    draped    Aphrodite    for 

and   a    nude    Aphrodite   for 
Knidos,  cities   on    the   coast   of 

Minor  separated  from  each 
other  by  a  narrow  strait.  ( >f  the 
draped  Koan  Aphrodite,  we  have 
no  certain  adequate  copy,  hut  in 
the  case  of  the  Knidian  Aphrodite 
we  are  more  fortunate.  The 
Aphrodite  of  the  Vatican  (  Fig. 
probably  the  best  ex- 
tant represent  ition  of  her.  She 
appears  nude,  riNing  from  her 
hath,  or  going   to   it,  as   is  shown 

on  coins  of  Knidos.  Praxiteles 
probably  had  before  him  as  a  model  the  celebrated  Phryne  ;  hut  his 
artist  soul  carried  him  above  sensual  and  even  mundane  thoughts 
as  he  saw  in  a  vision  the  incarnate  goddess  entering  her  bath.  The 
broken  right  arm  i^  here  represented  as  instinctively  thrown  forward 

at   the   thought    of    being    surprised.      There    is   a   shrinking    as    o| 

mod<  ■  its  back  at  the  "  thought  of  her  own  loveliness. " 


1  i'..   102. — Aphrodite  ol  Knidos. 
(Rome,  Vatican.) 


222  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

It  is  said  that  Nikomedes,  King  of  Bithynia,  so  coveted  the 
statue  that  to  have  it  as  his  own  he  offered  to  pay  the  public  debt 
of  the  city  of  Knidos.  We,  of  course,  have  no  statement  of  the 
amount  of  this  debt,  but  it  was  doubtless  considerable.  No  per- 
suasion, however,  could  induce  the  city  to  part  with  the  choice 
statue,  which  ultimately  perished  in  a  fire  at  Constantinople  near 
the  end  of  the  fifth  century  a.d. 

It  is  likely  that  Praxiteles  at  one  time  sojourned  not  only  at 
Knidos,  but  at  other  places  along  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor.  The 
Aphrodite  of  Kos,  the  people  of  which  city  preferred  her  to  the 
Knidian,  has  been  thought  to  be  represented  by  the  "  Venus  of 
Aries,"1  now  in  the  Louvre,  although  this  is  draped  only  from  the 
hips  downward.  The  head  has  fully  as  much  dignity  as  that  of  the 
statue  in  the  Vatican,  which  nevertheless  carries  off  the  plaudits. 

There  is  a  certain  gradation  or  degradation  to  be  observed  in 
the  line  of  extant  Aphrodites.  They  seem  to  begin  with  the 
Capitoline  copy  of  the  Aphrodite  of  Knidos,  where  we  see  a  proper 
shrinking  of  a  glorious  being,  and  to  end  with  the  "  Venus  dei 
Medici,"  who  shows  no  shrinking  as  she  exposes  the  charms  of 
which  she  is  fully  conscious.  Of  the  various  heads  of  the  Knidian 
Aphrodite  that  are  preserved,  the  Kaufmann  head-  in  Berlin  is 
perhaps  the  most  noteworthy. 

The  Sauroktonos  described  by  Pliny3  was,  by  exception,  a  work 
of  bronze,  and  shows  the  sportive  side  of  the  artist.  The  statue 
represents  a  youthful  nude  figure,  probably  a  young  Apollo,  teas- 
ing a  lizard.  Some  regard  him  as  preparing  for  the  slaying  of 
the  Python.  Here  appears  conspicuously  the  famous  Praxitelean 
S,4  which  reappears  in  several  of  his  figures,  notably  in  the  Satyr 
(Marble  Faun). 

But  let  us  now  return  to  our  one  "original."  We  must  make 
the  most  of  it,  even  if  it  is  but  a  fragment  of  the  glorious  whole  of 

1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  296 ;  Von  Mach,  203. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  161. 

3  Pliny,  34.  70;    Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  234;    Von  Mach,  186. 

4  The  gentle  bend  in  the  body  has  been  not  inaptly  so  called. 


I  Hi:    FOURTH    CEN  II  KY 


«3 


Praxiteles' works.  "Mild  Hennes,"  Wordsworth  has  fitly  called 
the  god;  and  here  we  behold  him  in  that  character  (Fig.  103). 
Benignity  beams  from  his  features  as  he  holds  on  his  left  arm  the 
infant  Dionysos,  seeming  to  look  past  him  into  space, dreaming  <>r 
half  dreaming  with  an  apparent 

getfulness  of  the  child  god, 
who  seems  trying  to  arrest  hi* 
attention.  This  attitude  is  re- 
produced in  several  small 
bronzes,  in  one  of  which 
Hermes  holds  a  bunch  ot  grapes 
before  the  infant  Dionysos.  In 
another  he  looks  out  into  space 
past  Dionysos,  whom  he  seems 
to  utterly  ignore.  The  latter 
seem-,  to  be  in  the  attitude  oi 
our  original.  The  infant  is  ex- 
cited, reaching  out  his  hands  ; 
but  Hermes  looks  straight  before 
him  as  in  a  dream. 

I  appre<  1  ite  the  different  e 
between  an  original  and  a  copy, 
one  needs  only  to  look  at  this 
group,  in  which,  however,  the 
infant     is     a      mere     accessory. 

I  -n  without  training  one  feels 
the  difference.  It  is  not  in  the 
easy  attitude  nor  in  the  exquisite 
finish  nor  in  the  a<  tion.  It  is 
the  inexplicable  spirit  of  the  master  shining  out  'Hie  head  is, 
of  course,  the  principal  thin-.  We  have  ioN>>  enough  which 
d<c<l  to  admire;  but  lure  is  a  statue  which  we  are  com 

dmir<\      It    is    not,   however,    in    the    list    instance    the 

body  or  the  limbs  or  the  graceful  Praxitelean  S  that  attracts  us; 
it  is  thai   mild  and  \   1        Hike  head.    The  high  arched  dome 


I'h ;.  103        1  [ei mes  "I  Praj 
(Olj  mpia.) 


224 


GREEK  SCULPTURE 


of  the  skull  is  contrasted  with  the  flat  heads  of  Tegea,  full  of 
physical  force.  High  intelligence  and  tenderness  become  pre- 
dominant. What,  then,  can  we  think  of  the  art  of  Praxiteles 
when  this  Hermes  was  hardly  thought  worthy  of  mention,  and 
was  dismissed  by  Pausanias  without  a  word  of  praise?  What 
should  we  say  and  feel  if  we  had  before  our  eyes  the  Satyr  and 
the  Eros  which  the  master  considered  to  be  his  best  works? 
Perhaps  our  judgement  might  not  have  been  his.     We  might  have 


Fm.  104.  —  Apollo  contending  with  Marsyas  in  Music. 
(Athens,  National  Museum.) 

preferred  the  godlike  forms  for  which  his  beloved  Phryne  furnished 
the  incarnate  beauty,  seen  in  the  goddesses  of  Knidos  and  Kos. 
All  the  figures  of  Praxiteles  are  intensely  Athenian  and  in  contrast 
to  what  we  know  of  Skopas,  who  would  perchance  pass  at  Athens 
as  somewhat  of  a  stranger. 

Praxiteles  is  known  to  have  made  at  Mantineia,  probably  about 
362  B.C.,  when  Epaminondas  restored  the  city,  a  group  of  three 
statues,  Leto,  Apollo,  and  Artemis,  as  cultus  statues.  We  know 
that  they  were  set  up  on  a  single  elongated  base  in  one  half  of 
a  double  temple.  Neither  the  temple  nor  the  base  has  been 
found.     But  the  excavations  of  the  French  School  at  Mantineia 


THE    FOURTH    CENTURY  a*5 

brought  to  light  in  1887  three  marble  slabs  —  the  fourth  is  missing 
—  which  once  ornamented  this  base.  A  slab  presenting  Marsyas 
contending  with  Apollo  for  victory  in  music,  with  a  Phrygian 
between  them  ready  to  slay  the  audacious  Satyr,  was  on  the  front 
side  (Fig.  104).  To  the  left  of  Apollo  a  slab  containing  three 
Muses  is  lost.  Apollo  is  brought  as  nearly  .is  possible  to  the 
centre.  The  other  two  extant  slabs,  with  three  Muses  each, 
were  placed  anminl  the  corners  on  the  ends.  The  base  was  set 
up  against  the  partition  wall  ;  and  the  subject  exactly  filled  the 
space.  The  deeper  tutting  in  the  moulding  at  the  bottom  on  the 
front  side  is  in  marked  contrast  to  that  on  the  other  two  sides.1 
Of  course  the  principal  interest  attaches  to  the  slab  which  pre- 
sents the  trial  of  skill  in  music,  where  Apollo  sits  calmly  awaiting 
the  overthrow  of  the  audacious  Marsyas,  who  dared  to  vie  with 
the  invincible-  god.  He  has  gone  farther  than  Myron's  Satyr  who 
dropped  his  pipes  before  Athena.  He  is  straining  every  muscle, 
since  his  life  is  the  forfeit  of  failure.  On  the  left  sits  the  calm 
god  waiting  to  touch  his  lyre,  and  confound  the  audacious  wretch 
who  has  pledged  his  skin.  His  fate  is  indicated  by  the  Phrygian 
who  stands  with  knife  in  hand  looking  toward  him.  Apollo  will 
soon  blast  him  with  the  notes  of  his  lyre.  "All  that  the  gods 
nd  (aim." 

While  these  reliefs  may  not  have  been  1  arved  by  Praxiteles 
himself,  they  are  not  unworthy  of  the  young  sculptor.  It  is  not 
improbable  that  he  inspired  them  even  if  he  did  not  carve  them 
with  his  own  hand.  In  either  case  they  serve  as  a  pledge  of 
gre  rks  to  o  >me. 

A     -"  Sculptor     like     Praxiteles    doubtless    had    some    works 

bed  to  him  with  which  he  had    nothing  to  do.      His  name  was 

once  I  on  one  of  the  bases  of  the  colossi  of  Monte  Cavallo. 

This  has  generally  been  regarded  as  a  hoax  ;  hut  these  woiks  have 
ribed  by  Furtwangler  to  u  Praxiteles  the  Elder"1 
and  Pheidi 

1  W.  An  it  PraxittUt aui  Mantintx 

lowy  figure. 


226 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


The  same  author  has  also  claimed  for  Praxiteles  the  already 
famous  but  enigmatical  bust  found  at  Eleusis  in  1885  in  the  pre- 
cinct of  Pluto  (Fig.  105).  Both  he  and  Benndorf  claimed  the  prior- 
ity of  having  fixed  its  status  as  a  god  of  the  nether  world  under  the 
name  of  Eubuleus,  a  euphemistic  name  for  Hades.  The  stout 
neck  and  the  somewhat  sinister  face  seemed  to  furnish  corrobora- 
tion. The  ascription  of 
the  bust  to  Praxiteles  was 
shared  by  both.  The  in- 
scription E{i/3ouAevs  Ilpa^t- 
Te'Aous,  in  letters  of  Roman 
times,  on  a  headless  herm 
in  the  Vatican  seemed  to 
close  the  case.  Inscrip- 
tions with  the  name  of 
Eubuleus  on  both  a  statue 
base  and  a  relief  in  the 
sacred  precinct  seemed  to 
be  a  superfluous  corrobora- 
tion. 

Otto  Kern1  disturbed 
this  consensus  by  main- 
taining that  Eubuleus  is 
Zeus.  The  Lakratides 
relief  at  Eleusis 2  mentions 
a  priest  0€ov  ko.1  0eas  koI 
Ev/JovAeoj?.  Since  Oeov  is  Hades,  Eubuleus  is  somebody  else, 
viz.  Zeus.  In  an  inscription  at  Paros  we  read  of  Demeter,  Kore, 
and  Zeus  Eubuleus,  where  Eubuleus  is  clearly  an  epithet  of 
Zeus.  Kern  regards  as  Triptolemos  the  youthful  figure  called 
by  Furtwangler  and  Benndorf  Eubuleus.  But  it  can  hardly  be 
denied  that  the  head  has  something  dark  and  sinister,  a  trait 
which  may  have  been  accentuated  by  the  overhanging  eye- 
brows now  badly  battered.  At  any  rate  the  impression  made  by 
1  Atk.  Mitt.  16  (1891),  1.  2  Ephem.  Arch.  1886,  PI.  3,  2. 


Fig.  105.  —  Eubuleus.     (Athens,  National 
Museum.) 


1  111'    FOURTH    CEN  fURY 


227 


the  head,  now  in  the  National  Museum  at  Athens,  is  deep.  If 
Praxiteles  reallj  carved  it.  he  must  have  mule  in  this  strong 
face  a  wide  departure  from  his  usually  gentle  faces. 

There  are  some,  among  them  Ernest  Gardner,  who  would  place 
this  bust  in  the  Alexandrian  period,  and  call  it  a  bust  of  Alex- 
ander himself  or  one  of  the  Diadochi.  It  is  of  the  finest  Pentelic 
marble  a<  cording  to 
Lepsius,  our  chief  au- 
thority, and  not.  as  is 
Uy  stated,  of  Parian. 
The  bust  is  certainly  an 
enigma.  It  is  roughly 
chipped  away  at  the 
bottom  ;  a  sort  of  pre- 
teiK  e  of  .  lothing  ap- 
pears ;  the  neck  is  un- 
commonly stout  ;  the 
hair  falls  down  in  large 
m.isM->  in  a  u  ly  that 
we  see  nowhere  else. 
It  is  a  face  that  haunts 
I  1  irdner  is  nearly, 
if  not  quite,  alone  in 
disparaging  it,  saj  ing  : 
''The  small  eyes  ami 
sensual  mouth 
Ale xa nder  with  t he 
stronger  and  Letter 
parts  of  his  character 
tted." 

With  the  light  that  has  been  shed  on  the  style  of  Skopas  in  the 
last  two  de<  :  the  nineteenth  (  entury,  we  1  an  have  little  diffi- 

culty in  div  riminating  between  his  works  and  those  of  Praxiteles. 
Skop  the  Michelangelo  of  the  period,  Praxiteles  had  more 

t  of  Raphael. 


Fig.  106. —  1 1 

Museum.  I 


(British 


228 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


The  Skopas  eye  enables  us  to  see  in  the  Demeter  of  Knidos 

(Fig.  1 06)  a  work  of  that  master, 
though  Collignon  ascribes  her  "to 
a  contemporary  of  Praxiteles." 
Nowhere  do  we  see  clearer  char- 
acteristics of  Skopas.  The  eyes 
are  sunken  and  worn  with  suffer- 
ing. The  goddess  sits  before 
us  as  the  veritable  Mother  of 
Grief  mourning  for  her  beloved 
daughter.  The  British  Museum 
contains  no  statue  that  is  more 
touching.  The  Asklepios  of 
Melos  (Fig.  107)  can  hardly  be 
separated  from  the  Demeter. 
But  why  should  the  gods  and 
goddesses  go  mourning  ?  It 
must  be  the  spirit  of  the  fourth 
Head  of  Asklepios  from  century,  with  its  tendency  toward 

Melos.     (Athens,  National  Museum.)     pathos. 


Lysippos 

The  sixth  of  the  greatest  Greek  sculptors  is  Lysippos,  who  was 
probably  not  much,  if  at  all,  later  than  Praxiteles.  He  was  a  force 
much  more  akin  to  Skopas  than  to  Praxiteles.  He  was  no  ideal- 
ist. His  aim  was  to  bring  sculpture  down  nearer  to  nature. 
Beginning  as  a  humble  artisan  at  Sikyon,  he  took,  or  professed  to 
take,  nature  as  his  models.  It  is  said  that  at  an  early  stage  in  his 
career  he  asked  the  painter  Eupompos,  his  fellow-citizen,  whom 
among  his  predecessors  he  had  best  take  as  his  exemplar,  and 
Eupompos  replied  by  pointing  to  the  passing  crowd  and  saying  :T 
"  Imitate  nature  and  not  the  work  of  any  artist."  Lysippos,  taking 
this  advice,  broke  with   the    traditions   of   the  Argive-Sikyonian 

1  Pliny,  34.  61. 


THE    1  (H  Kill    CEN  l'URY 


2  2  g 


school,  and  made  a  revolution  in  sculpture  by  taking  his  models 
from  nature.  He-  was  probably  a  very  prolific  sculptor.  I't  is  said 
that,  fur  every  statue  that  he  made,  he  used  to  drop  a  drachma  into 
a  va»e,  probably  with  a  slit,  and  that,  when  the  vase  was  broken 
open  after  his  death,  it  was  found 
to  contain  1500  drachmas.  L'ould 
he  have  made  thirty  bronze  statues 
a  year? 

The  canon  of  1'olykleitos  had 
made  the  head  one-seventh  of  the 
total  height  of  the  figure.  Lysip- 
pos  discarded  this  canon  and 
made  the  head  one-eighth.  The 
change  from  the  canon  of  Poly- 
kleitos  to  that  of  Lysippos  has 
long  been  supposed  to  be  visu- 
alized in  the  far-famed  Apoxyo- 
meiios  of  the  Vatican  |  Fig.  108), 
in  which  it  has  long  been  thought 
the  result  of  I  ysippos1  great  in- 
novation was  to  be  seen.  But 
within  a  I  ive  question 

arisen,  whether  this  work  is 
really  a  copy  1  if  I  j  sippos'  Apoxyo- 
■ 

It  has  been  asked:  "What  do 
if  the  original  bronze 
of  Lysippos?"  We  must  answer '  : 
'•  V  it  inn<  ii  more  than  that 
I  ppos  made  an  Apoxyomenos,  whi<  h  was  1  arried  to  Rome,  was 
set  up  by  Man  rippa  in  from  of  bis  Thermae,  and  w.is  there 

much  admired,     i  facts  do  not  carry  us  tar,  foi  the  subjeel 

:i»*  omni hi  one,  and  we  p  00  detailed  description  of 

the  treatment  of  it  by  Lysippos     Bui  the  marble  statue  m  ques- 
1  Tarbcll,  t  j  Ark  and  Stitnett,  St,  Louu     1904  ,  tit  61  t- 


1  ig.  108.  —  Apoxyomi 
Vatican.) 


1  Rome, 


23° 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


tion  exhibits  a  system  of  bodily  proportions  radically  different  from 
that  of  Polykleitos,  and  agreeing  with  the  valuable,  though  inade- 
quate, indications  afforded  by  Pliny  regarding  the  innovations 
introduced  by  Lysippos.     On  reflection  we  see  that  the  agreement 

does  not  really  clinch  the  matter.  At 
most  it  only  proves  that  the  original 
of  the  Apoxyomenos  of  the  Vatican  is 
not  earlier  than  Lysippos." 

The  excellence  of  the  Vatican 
Apoxyomenos  led  to  the  belief  that  it 
represented  the  "canon  "  of  Lysippos, 
which  was  regarded  as  his  ideal  of 
proportions  ;  and  no  one  doubted,  or 
differed,  until  with  the  discovery 
of  the  statue  of  Agias  a  great  light 
flashed  from  the  recent  excava- 
tions at  Delphi.  A  marble  statue, 
one  of  a  group  of  eight,  was  set  upon 
a  pedestal  which  bore  the  name  of 
Agias  (Fig.  109)  ;  and  the  whole 
group  represented  a  Thessalian  family 
from  Pharsalos.1  Homolle  hesitat- 
ingly pronounced  these  statues  more 
Skopasian  than  Lysippean.  But  while 
some  misgiving  was  felt,  a  still  greater 
light  suddenly  dawned.  Erich  Preu- 
ner 2  discovered  a  copy  of  an  inscrip- 
tion found  at  Pharsalos,  identical 
with  the  inscription  at  Delphi,  except  that  it  gave  in  addition 
the  sculptor's  name  ;  and  the  name  was  Lysippos  !  A  revolu- 
tion now  came.  The  Delphic  statues  were  looked  upon  no 
longer  as  Skopasian,  but  as  of  the  real  style  of  Lysippos,  and 
the  only  test  to  apply  in  treating  of  the  works  of  that  master. 

1  B.C.//.  23  (1899),  421,  Pis.  10,  11. 

2  Ein  Delphisches  Weihgeschenk,  1900. 


Fig.  109.  —  Agias.     (Delphi.) 


THE    FOUR!  H    CEN  11  KV  231 

It  must,  however,  be  taken  into  consideration  th.it  they  were 
carved  in  marble  at  a  (.late  considerably  later  than  the  bronze 
originals  at  Pharsalos,  and  cannot,  therefore  afford  the  final 
test  of  style,  but  on  the  other  hand  we  must  remember  that 
they  were  carved  when  LysippOS  was  still  alive.  They,  there- 
fore, probablv  convey  a  fairly  correct  impression  of  the  lost 
originals.  We  can,  then,  in  considerable  measure  depend  upon 
them.  Next  to  having  the  originals  is  a  copy  made  in  the  life- 
time of  the  sculptor.1 

We  here  see  plainly  the  same  intensity  of  feeling  which  appears  in 
the  faces  of  the  Skopas  heads  from  Tegea  ;  but  it  is  softened  to  a 
touch  of  melancholy.  The  head  of  Agias  has,  moreover,  a  shorter 
horizontal  diameter  from  front  to  rear  than  the  heads  from  Tegea. 
While  the  Agias  is  not  a  first-rate  work  of  art,  being  somewhat 
lived  and  finished,  we  are  bound  to  take  it  as  affording 
our  best  available  evidence  as  to  the  style  of  1  ysippos.  It  comes 
to  us  through  a  translation,  so  to  speak,  while  the  Apoxyomenos 
belongs  in  a  different  sphere.  Percy  Gardner  well  says  "Thus 
the  new  dis<  overy  amounts  to  something  like  a  revolution." 

It  is  now  nearly  thirty  years  since  the  establishing  of  a  real 
Skopas  head  by  the  studies  of  Treu  and  <  rraef;  and  we  have  just 
come  to  see  how  much  akin  to  Skopas  is  Lysippos.     The  Agias 
shows  us,  but  not  with  the  tremendous  energy  of  Skopas,  the  deep- 
ing brows,  and  the  breathing  mouth.     Com- 
1  with  the  helmeted   head  from    |._-  1  (p.  214),  the  Agias  is 
ind  shows  a  tinge  of  melancholy. 
I'  rcy  G  rdner  would  break  up  the  great  Skopasian  group  estab 
lished  by  <  -r  tefand  withdraw  from  it  the  Meleager,  whi<  h  lie  would 
n  to  Lysippos.1  long  known  as  the  Apoxyo- 

menos  of]  he  would  classify  with  the  "  BorgheseW  arrior"of 

,  making  it  a  product  of  the  Hellenistic  period. 
w  •  tread  more  firmly  when  we  approach  the   types  of 

mder.     Plutarch'  has  put  it  beyond  question  th.u  Lysippos 

'  1  Iner,  /.//.v.  23  (1903),  127. 

Plntin  b,    /.'•  1.   1.'  •   .1 


232 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


was  in  a  sense  a  court  sculptor  to  Alexander,  and  that  he  made 
several  statues  of  him,  allowing  the  somewhat  distorted  neck  of 
the  world-conqueror  to  appear  in  various  gradations.  Numerous 
statues  and  busts  of  Alexander  may,  therefore,  with  some  confi- 
dence be  regarded  as  derived  in  a  greater  or  less  degree  from 
Lysippos,  even  if  what  is  left  to  us  is  mere  flotsam  and  jetsam 
of  once  much  better  copies. 

The  bust  in  the  British  Museum1  shows  in  a  comparatively 
slight  degree  the  distorted  neck,  the  hair  only  slightly  dishevelled, 

the  eyes  moderately  deep-set,  and 
the  mouth  not  too  deeply  cut. 
This  is  probably  the  best  starting 
point  in  the  Alexander  series, 
since  every  one  of  the  well- 
accepted  features  is  here  toned 
down,  as  they  would  naturally  be 
by  a  master  like  Lysippos. 

A  colossal  marble  head  in  the 
Capitoline  Museum,2  which  has 
long  been  supposed  to  represent 
Alexander,  has  also  a  distorted 
neck  and  parted  lips.  Perhaps 
the  features  are  intended  to  re- 
semble those  of  Helios.  The 
manelike  hair  seems  to  fit  a  being 
more  than  mortal ;  but  the  distorted  neck  hints  at  Alexander. 

There  is  a  herm  in  the  Louvre  (Fig.  no)  which  seems  to  repre- 
sent Alexander  in  a  calm  mood.  The  locks  that  start  up  from  the 
middle  of  the  forehead,  and  the  parted  lips,  speak  of  energy. 
In  its  restraint  it  conveys  perhaps  the  best  impression  of  the 
great  conqueror.  The  face  is  strong  and  leonine.  On  the  front 
of  the  bust  is  cut  AAEZANAPDS  <t>IAinnDY.  This  bust 
shows  no  distortion  of  the  neck. 

1  Bernouilli,  Die  erhaltenen  Darstellungen  Alexanders  des  Grossen,  PI.  6. 

2  Bernouilli,  ibid.,  PI.  7. 


FIG.  iio. —  Herm  of  Alexander. 
(Louvre.) 


THE    FOURTH    CENTURV  233 

Another  bust, in  the  Ufhzi  Gallery,1  called  sometimes  the  "  1  >_\  ing 
Alexander,"  passes  the  limits  of  idealism.  In  fact  it  is  doubtful 
whether  this  head  belongs  among  the  Alexander  heads  at  all.  It 
may  be  classed  with  the  i  in. 

A  statue  in  Munich1  represents  the  monarch  deified  but  ab- 
surdly restored,  anointing  his  shins  from  a  small  lekythos.  Similar 
to  this  in  pose  is  a  figure  in  the  Lateran  decked  out  with  all 
the  paraphernalia  of  a  Poseidon.  It  is  a  little  startling  to  find 
that  the  trident,  the  prow  of  the  ship,  the  dolphin,  both  legs  below 
the  knees,  the  left  arm,  the  lower  part  of  the  right  arm,  parts  of  the 
hair,  and  beard  are  restored.  We  find,  however,  from  various 
copies4  that  these  restorations  are  in  a  measure  justified  ;  and  this 
battered  hulk,  has  come  forth  in  glory,  and  is  much  superior  to 
the  Poseidon  of  Melos  in  Athens.  Though  it  is  a  copy  it  certainly 
has  the  Lysippean  eyes  and  the  bent  head.  It  is  not  unlikely  that 
ppos  made  the  original  bronze  for  the  Isthmian  precinct, 
Bacred  to  Poseidon.  The  attitude  with  a  bent  leg  is,  of  course,  not 
a  creation  of  Lysippos.  We  already  find  it  on  the  Parthenon  frieze. 
But  he  made  use  of  it.  Another  figure  somewhat  similar  is  seen 
in  the  Louvre.  The  face,  however,  is  turned  over  the  left 
shoulder  instead  of  the  right.'  This  also  may  be  as<  ribed  to 
Lysippos.  An  athlete  it  certainly  is,  such  as  Lysippos  loved  to 
make.  It  also  resembles  Myron's  figures  often  alluded  to  as  "  dis- 
torta."  Except  for  the  intense  mouth  one  might  call  it  Myronian  ; 
but  this  feature  now  inclines  us  to  Lysippos.  Here  we  see 
the   slender   proportions  of  an  athleto  . 

Leaving  now  the  clear  trace  of  the  Alexander  type  io  s<  ulpture, 
irn  to  coins  showing  the  same  leonine  fa<  e.     Here  the  heads, 

however,  are  not  always  easily  distinguished  from  those  of  hi--  sur- 

•r^,  and   mop-  especially  from  those- of  his  contemporaries. 

II    •  the-   type   was   probably   set   by    Lysipp 

1  I'.runn-I'.ru.  kmann,   Ma  l8l       Von  Mil..  2 
-'  Brani)  Bt  u  kmann,  No,  105  ;    Von  Mai  b,   ; 

*  I'.runn   I'.ru.  Ion. 11. '  1  \. 

•  Reinach,  Repertoi  I    illignon,  ii.   ^19.  •  Collignon,  ii.  421, 


234  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

We  now  turn  to  the  famous  gigantic  Farnese  Herakles1  in 
Naples,  a  wonder  to  the  cicerone  on  account  of  its  bigness. 
In  it  we  seem  to  lose  all  traces  of  the  style  of  Lysippos.  We  are 
told  that  his  favourite  subjects  were  Zeus  and  Herakles,  and  we  know 
that  Herakles  was  honoured  at  Sikyon  with  a  statue  by  Lysippos. 
That  the  Herakles  in  the  Naples  Museum  really  represents  a 
work  of  Lysippos  seems  established  by  a  rather  poor  replica2  in  the 
Pitti  Palace,  which  bears  the  inscription  epyov  AwiVtou.  The 
Naples  copy  is  marked  on  its  rock  base  as  a  work  of  "  Glykon  of 
Athens"  in  an  inscription  not  earlier  than  the  first  century  b.c. 
One  feels  a  certain  repugnance  to  this  great  hulking  brute,  so 
different  from  the  Herakles  in  the  metopes  of  the  temple  of 
Olympian  Zeus.  But  it  is  hazardous  to  reject  the  evidence  of  the 
inscription.  In  the  first  century  b.c.  Lysippos  was  not  so  much 
in  vogue  as  Praxiteles,  and  was  not,  therefore,  very  likely  to  have 
his  name  cut  on  a  statue  base  haphazard.  We  have,  therefore,  to 
face  the  fact  of  divergent  styles  in  the  same  master.  For  our 
peace  of  mind  this  statue  might  well  have  been  sunk  in  the  sea ; 
but  it  is  here  with  fairly  good  credentials  of  Lysippean  origin.  It 
has  been  remarked  that  the  head  is  unduly  small ; 3  but  the  flow- 
ing beard  which  counts  as  part  of  the  head  makes  the  head  seem 
even  larger  in  proportion  to  the  body  than  we  should  expect.  It 
is  probable  that  the  bronze  statue  was  colossal,  since  we  know  of 
several  such  colossal  statues  by  Lysippos,  and  reduced  somewhat 
in  the  marble  copy. 

But  if  we  wish  to  set  before  our  eyes  a  type  of  a  bronze  statue 
by  Lysippos,  we  may  find  it  in  Hermes  reposing  after  a  toilsome 
journey,  now  in  the  Naples  Museum  (Fig.  in).  Here  is  a  living 
bronze,  so  to  speak,  moulded  by  a  master  who  was  a  maker  of 
athletes.  Many  a  wild  guess  at  authors  of  statues  has  missed  the 
mark  much  wider  than  a  positing  of  a  close  relationship  of  this 
bronze  with  Lysippos,  the  master  sculptor  of  athletes.     We  might 

1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  285;    Von  Mach,  236. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  284. 

3  Von  Mach,  Handbook  of  Greek  and  Roman  Sculpture,  p.  247. 


THE    1  olkTII    i  I  \  1  I  k\ 


-35 


imagine  that  at  a  touch  this  Hermes,  now  wearied  with  toil,  would 
straighten  himself  up  lor  another  of  his  ceaseless  errands.  The 
potency  of  energy  is  certainly  here.  We  can  put  our  hand  upon 
it  and  say,  "l  his  is  typical  Lysippean."  It  may  be  a  copy,  but  the 
spirit  of  the  master  is  lure  seen  in  every  muscle  and  in  its  atti- 
tude. 1  hie  before 
is  the  untiring  mes- 
gerof  the  g<  >ds,  now 
taking  breath  before 
another  journey.  The 
spent  runner  is  pulling 
himself  together  for 
another  toil.  In  an 
instant  the  mus 
will  tighten  again,  and 
off  he  will  speed  to 
some    Kalyi  The 

"  heraM  Mm  ury  "  is 
nowhere  else  brought 
so  near  to  us.  We 
almost    seem    to 

re  us   the  original 

bronze.     Hut  we  must 

take  no.  rash  leaps. 
We   may  at   1< 

that  this  copy,  if  so  we  must  call  it,  might  stand  unashamed  in  the 
•   works  of  Lysippos  himself. 
Among  tii<-  woik>  of  Lysippos  we  mu  t  probably  also  put  one  "i 

the    "w  "    in    Naples,1   taken    from    1 1  •  -  r*  ulanciiin.    the   one 

standing  It  has  been  remarked  tint  this  one  is  so 

mil"  h  ti:  ,  the  Other  that  the  temptation  to  SUSpe<  t  an  original 

-t.    tt  comes  from  the  same  place  as  the 

bronze  Hei  d  the  kinship  is  patent.      Why  not  in   this   i 

•  that  bears  his  <  re<l<-nti  lis  on  his  fai 
1  lirunn-l'.ru'  km. um,  No.  354;    Von  MjU  li.  289. 


Fig,  hi.  —  Hermes  resting  from  Ins  Labours. 
( Naples  Museum.) 


236 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


The  bronze  statue  of  a  boy  with  hands  (wrongly  restored)  raised 
as  in  prayer  (Fig.  112),  which  is  in  the  Royal  Museum  in  Berlin, 

may  be  regarded  as  a  work 
of  Lysippos  or  his  school. 
At  any  rate  it  shows  his 
influence. 

Lysippos  worked,  like 
other  celebrated  sculptors, 
in  various  and  widely  sepa- 
rated places.  Called  to 
Rhodes,  he  made  a  sun-god 
on  a  four-horse  chariot. 
He  seems  to  have  delighted 
in  making  figures  of  Hera- 
kles.  One  of  these,  a 
colossal  figure,  made  at 
Tarentum,  journeyed  to 
Rome,  and  then  to  Con- 
stantinople. The  hero  was 
represented  as  exhausted 
and  depressed,  leaning  his 
head  upon  his  bent  arm  as 
if  he  had  reached  the 
uttermost  of  endurance. 
Thus  we  find  the  introduc- 
tion of  pathos,  which  is  an 
indication  that  a  new  era 
was  at  hand.  Lysippos, 
therefore,  may  be  regarded 
as  entering  a  new  realm 
where  pathos  begins  to 
show  itself  openly.  We  are 
near  the  Hellenistic  age. 

FlG.  112.  —  Bronze  Statue  of  a  Boy  in  Prayer.  J  &     & 

(Berlin  Museum.)  made  an  allegorical  statue 


THE   FOURTH    CENTURY  237 

called  Kairos,  or  as  we  might  s.n  "Occasion."     We  know  nothing 
of  its  appearance.     We  have  the  bare  statement  of  its  existence. 

But  Lysippos  also  made  a  Kairos  at  Sik\on.  which  was  probably 
much  more  famous,  if  we  can  judge  from  the  epigrams.  Lysippos1 
K  uros  was  represented  as  swiftly  passing  along  on  a  chariot, 
challenging  the  swift  and  agile  to  catch  him.  He  was  represented 
lid,  except  for  a  single  lock  on  his  forehead.  The  swift  and 
agile  alone  can  grasp  him  by  this  lock.  Hut  when  "Occasion" 
slips  past,  all  attempt  to  catch  him  is  vain.  From  this  allegory 
conies  down  to  us  the  phrase.  "   lake  time  by  the  forelock." 

Other  Masters  of  the  F01  rth  Cent  ky 

We  now  leave  the  discussion  of  the  three  great  masters  of  the 
fourth    century,   and    turn    to    a    few    lesser    lights,   and    to   some 
.ins   which  we  can  ascribe  to  no  definite  author.      Epidauros 
here  calls  for  some  attention  ;  and  since  we  know  from  inscrip- 
tions that  Timotheos  and  Thrasymedes  worked  on  the  temple  of 
Asklepios,  we  may  reasonably  assign  three  female  figures,  doubt- 
Nikes,1  on  the  three  corners  of  the  east  g  ible,  to  these  sculp- 
The    effect  of  these  figures,  which  appear   to   11  >  it   gently 
down  to  bless,  must  have  been  exceedingly  pleasing.     Nor  must  we 
;  a  fighting  Amazon  from  the  gable  group  which  is  much  like 
the  ;  on  the  Mausoleum  frieze.'-'    The  hand,  or  at  least  the 

spirit,  of  Timotheos  seems  here  apparent.     Even  in  her  mutilated 
1  ondition  this  Amazon  is  seen  to  be  raising  her  right  hand  to  de  il 
rrible  blow  with  her  battle-ax,  as  did  Dexileos  with  his  spear 
_'.  94).      This   figure  is  in  marked  contrast    to  the  floating 
figures.      She   Bits   easily  On   her  wonderfully  foreshortened    horse. 

All   the  effect  of  the  foreshortening,  which  would  be  beautiful 

whei  from  the   ground,  Uxjks  out    Ol    proportion   when   seen 

.  the  level.     Epidauros  has  furnished  also  two  nearly  square 
reliefs-1  of  the  healing  god,  one  of  which  is  so  fine4  that  we  are 

1  Kalil>a<lias,  Fouilh  faure,  i.,  PL  X,  i    ;. 

\   ■■!>     M.L.    Il, 

*  Katil>a<lias,  FouiUti  tTEpidaurt,  L  -'-■.         *  Bruno  Bruckmann,  N 


238 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


inclined  to  ascribe  it  to  Thrasymedes.  The  god  sits  on  his  throne 
with  his  left  leg  thrown  over  his  right  in  an  easy  attitude,  resting 
on  his  right  arm,  while  with  his  left  he  welcomes  his  worshippers. 


FIG.  113.  —  Choragic  Monument  of  Lysikrates. 

His  broad  breast  and  august  face  proclaim  the  god.     The  second 
relief  is  much  like  this,  but  less  grand. 

We  turn  from  these  mutilated  works  to  the  still  beautiful  Choragic 
monument  of  Lysikrates  at  Athens  (Fig.  113).  The  frieze  repre- 
sents the  triumph  of  Dionysos  and  his  attendant  Satyrs  over  some 


THE    Fol'RTH   CENTURY 


»39 


pirates  who  tried  to  overpower  ami  enslave  him.    Hut  the  god  trans- 
forms them  into  dolphins;  and  we  see  the  gradual  transformation 

proceeding  as  ire  pass  around  the  monument  Two  <>t  Stuart's  mag- 
nificent plates  having  by  accident  become  misplaced  in  his  great 
work,  the  gradual  transformation  is  not  there  apparent.'  These 
graceful  figures  are  fine  ex- 
amples of  low  relief  of  the 
time.  We  have  before  us 
perhaps  not  the  most  pre- 
tentious choragic  monument. 
But  since  the  others  have 
perished,  we  take  this  as  a 
beautiful  example.  The 
monument  is  dated  335— 
};i  B.C.  by  an  inscription: 
'•  I.vsikrates.sonof  Lysithides. 

(  horagos  1  vsiades  of 
Athens  trained  the  choros ; 
Euainetoswas  archon."  The 
circular  top  is  a  single  piece 
with  the  gorgeous  akanthos 
plant,  on  three  projecting 
points  of  which  the  coveted 
bron/e  tripod  rested. 

We  cannot  here  pass  over 

the  Eirene  and  Plutos  in  the 

Muni'  h   Museum  I  Fig.  1  14). 

I 'mil  recent  times  this  group, 

imilar  to  the  1  [ermes  and 

ed  to  be  a  <  opy  of  a  work  of  Kephisodotos, 
the  father  of  Praxiteles.     But  Furtwangler  has  advanced  excellent 

-ih  for  regarding  Kephisodotos  as  an  elder  brother  of  Praxit- 
;       drapery,  especially  the   folds   falling   straight   down 

'lie  Coo, ././.'.  8     189       .        u  t'"--  fir*  to  notice  Stout's  erroi  and 

hrin^j  out  the  true  order. 


I  i. ,.  1 1).      Eirene  and  Plutos.     1  Munich 


24o  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

over  the  left  leg,  reminds  one  of  the  fifth-century  figures,  espe- 
cially of  the  Maidens  of  the  Erechtheion.  But  the  group,  if  such 
we  may  call  it,  is  exceedingly  similar  to  the  Hermes  and  Dionysos, 
except  that  motherly  tenderness  here  replaces  the  dreamy  negli- 
gence of  the  older  god.  Man's  tenderness  is  here  set  over 
against  that  of  woman.1 

The  Sarcophagi  of  Sidon 

In  1887,  near  the  ancient  Sidon,  a  burial  vault  was  discovered 
by  the  energetic  Hamdy  Bey.2  The  contents  of  this  vault  were 
soon  brought  to  the  museum  of  Constantinople  and  exhibited 
to  the  wondering  world.  The  vault  was  in  fact  a  subterranean 
cemetery  composed  of  seven  chambers  grouped  around  a  cen- 
tral vestibule.  Twenty-two  sarcophagi  were  here  found  still  in 
situ.  Some  appear  to  be  of  the  fifth  century,  but  most  are  of  the 
fourth.  Confining  ourselves  to  the  best,  we  follow  approximately 
the  chronological  order. 

First  in  time  we  note  the  so-called  Satrap's  Sarcophagus,  which 
displays  in  low  relief  scenes  appropriate  to  the  life  of  the  oriental 
potentate.  It  has  suffered  from  moisture,  so  that  the  features  of 
the  persons  are  much  defaced.  One  side  shows  a  seated  monarch 
with  a  tiara.  His  left  hand  is  supported  by  a  sceptre  ;  his  right 
rests  on  the  arm  of  a  chair  which  is  supported  by  a  griffin.  In 
front  of  the  potentate  we  see  the  charioteer  turning  to  look  back 
at  his  lord,  and  standing  with  his  right  foot  on  the  ground,  while 
his  left  is  already  on  the  chariot.  Of  the  four  horses,  one  is 
already  eager  to  be  moving.  The  groom  who  holds  the  horses  is 
looking  sharply  to  the  right  and  presenting  his  back  to  the  spec- 
tator. The  chariot  has  no  wheels,  for  the  rosette  under  the  box 
cannot  be  a  wheel.    The  big  block  on  which  the  chariot  rests  is  a 

1  The  infant  Plutos  is  largely  restored.  A  better  copy  is  found  in  Athens, 
and  an  excellent  copy  of  the  torso  of  Eirene  is  in  the  Metropolitan  Museum 
in  New  York. 

2  Hamdy  Bey  and  Theodore  Reinach,  Une  nccropole  royale  a  Sidon,  396- 
411. 


THE    FOURTH    (  EN  I  I  KV 


241 


curious  anomaly.  The  ^tylc  indicates  that  this  relief  belongs  to 
the  middle  of  the  fifth  century  b.c.  The  stiffness  of  the  horses, 
iq  fact,  reminds  us  oi  the  quadriga  metope  of  Selinus,  which  is, 
1  4  <  .  turse,  .1  century  earlier. 

Next  in  order  of  time  comes  the  "  Lycian  Sarcophagus."  with  a 
high  ogive  roof  and  a  sphinx  and  a  griffin  cm  either  end.  On  each 
of  the  long  sides  two  quadrigas  pre-  eagerly  forward  in  a  lion 
hunt.     The  lion  in  being  strut  k  by  the  fierce  rout.      This  more 


m 


— 


.  115.  —  S  jus  of  the  Wei  nstantino]  ;m.) 

elaborate  sarcophagus  i-.  beyond  question  liter  thin  tin-  one  just 

nil  may    1"  ied  to  the  lir->t  i|u.irn-r   of  the  fourth 

tury.     The  mouldin  :  the  panels  is  exquisite.     The  whole 

ted  by  a  fine   Hellenic  spirit.     In  all   probability 

ppropriated  this  sarcoph        .  evidently  of  Greek 

1    niui  h    earlier   time    than    the  vault    in 

whi<  h  it  v.  id. 

te,  prol  '  ihagus  of  the  "  Wcep- 

[f  not        !:;!!  of  lit*-  an  the  "  I  j 

tint  of  the  s  itrap. 


242 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


Its  decoration  is  also  more  in  keeping  with  its  purpose.  Eighteen 
women  in  various  attitudes  of  grief  are  deployed  on  the  four  sides  of 
a  temple-like  Ionic  structure.  The  ornamentation  is  in  exquisite 
taste.  The  women,  while  showing  considerable  variety  of  pose, 
never  overstep  the  measure  of  grief  that  is  becoming.  The 
border  at  the  bottom  contains  several  hundred  miniature  figures 
on  a  field  below  the  columns  and  above  the  "  leaf  and  bud  "  orna- 
ment. This  whole  sarcophagus  is  so  typically  Greek  in  its  restraint 
that  it  cannot  have  come  from  any  other  source  than  a  Greek 


Fig.  116.  —  Alexander  Sarcophagus.     (Constantinople  Museum.) 


master's  atelier.  It  was  probably  made  to  order  for  a  potentate 
who  reigned  at  Sidon,  374-362  B.C.,  Stratos  I,1  a  pompous  Phil- 
hellene,  devoted  to  pleasure  and  surrounded  by  courtesans  and 
court  musicians  from  Ionia  and  Peloponnesos.  The  mourning  is 
continued  in  the  two  gables  and  in  the  attics,  the  ends  being 
given  up  to  grief,  and  the  long  sides  to  a  funereal  cortege.  This 
sarcophagus  is  the  embodiment  of  grief  restrained.  It  sounds  the 
same  note  that  Thucydides  makes  Perikles  to  sound  when  Athens 
was  sore  stricken  with  the  plague.  Perhaps  nowhere  has  the  idea 
of  bitter  grief  nobly  borne  been  so  exquisitely  presented  as  on 
this  monument. 

But  the  crowning  glory  of  all  the  sarcophagi  is  the  one  now  ad- 
mired under  the  name  of  the  "Alexander  Sarcophagus  "  (Fig.  116). 

1  Theopompos,  frag.  126. 


THE    FOURTH   CENTURY  243 

This  is  about  ten  feet  long  and  somewhat  over  six  feel  high.  The 
cover  is  in  the  form  of  a  roof  with  a  gable  at  each  end.  Alexander 
appear-  a-  the  prominent  figure  Oil  each  oi  the  long  sides,  in  a 
battle  and  as  the  leader  in  a  hunt.  Such  a  sarcophagus  was  lit 
only  for  an  Alexander  ;  and  yet  he  was  not  buried  in  it.  Perhaps 
the  intention  may  have  been  that  he  should  lie  in  it;  but  if  SO, 
the  intent  was  frustrated.  This  is  the  most  exquisite  Sarcophagus 
that  the  world  has  ever  seen.  Wherever  ornament  was  appropriate 
u  was  applied,  though  not  to  excess.  Fourteen  bands  encircle  it. 
It  is  not.  however,  the  abundance  of  ornament  but  the  exquisite 
finish  of  each  band  that  marks  it  as  a  marvel.  Apart  from  the 
mouldings,  which  practically  exhaust  the  whole  stock  that  the 
Greeks  employed,  there  was  the  painting,  the  delicate  poly- 
chromy,  at  which  all  the  world  wonders.  The  greal  scenes  on  the 
1  battle  and  a  hunt,  beggar  description.  In  both  of 
these  Alexander  is  present  as  the  leading  figure.  In  the  battle- 
m  ene  he  comes  riding  in  from  the  left  on  a  charger,  completely 

identified  by  the  lion's  head  which  he  wears.  His  javelin,  here 
invisible,  i>  like  the  bolt  of  great  Zeus.  before  him  horse  and 
rider  go  down.  The  weak  and  trousered  Persians  are  no  match 
for  him.     Here  and  there  a  Greek  appear-,  as  a  helper;  but  the 

demigod  needs  no  help.  It  i-,  however,  possible  to  identify  in 
the  stout  spearman  on  the  right,  Parmenio,  the  right  arm  of  Alex- 
ander, wearing  a  low  helmet  with  a  visor.  In  the  shock  l'armenio 
[throws  horse  and  rider  opposed  to  him,  and  the  noble  Persian 
falls,  to  join  the  dead  and  dying  who  are  scattered   on  the  field  of 

battle.     There  is  a  tow  h  of  pathos  in  the  tenderness  with  which  a 
3  in  his  arms  the  falling  antagonist  of  Parmenio. 
\  Greek  near  the  middle,  with  a  visor  like  that  of   Parmenio, 
i>  al  ty  warrior,  and  his  antagonist  at  his  feet  i-  begging 

m  vain  for  life.  This  <ir«-ek  has  been  called  Philotas  and  also 
Hephaistion.    V  here  dealing  only  in  probabilities. 

Noti,  bareheaded   and   nearly  nude   stout  fighter 

who  is  making  haw    of  the  Persians.    The  battl  all  one 

would  The  Persians,  everywhere  marked  by 


244  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

trousers  and  hoods,  go  down  with  little  resistance.  What  we  see 
is  an  epitome  of  a  battle,  whether  Issos  or  Arbela.  The  Persians, 
no  doubt,  gave  a  good  account  of  themselves,  showing  loyalty  to 
their  king  unto  death.  But  here  no  account  is  made  of  the  heroism 
of  the  beaten.      Vae  victis. 

The  other  long  side  of  the  sarcophagus  represents  a  lion  hunt. 
On  this  side  also  we  see  Alexander  riding  in,  bareheaded,  from  the 
left  with  his  mantle  fluttering  in  the  wind,  his  spear  poised  for 
attack  as  he  approaches  the  lion.  He  is  marked  as  Alexander 
by  the  diadem  around  his  hair.  In  front  of  him  is  a  noble  figure, 
but  evidently  an  oriental.  Charging  fearlessly  upon  the  lion,  he 
has  a  more  conspicuous  position  than  Alexander  himself.  His 
noble  horse  is  done  for,  although  a  hooded  oriental  belabours 
the  lion  with  a  club.  It  is  probable  that  Alexander  appears 
here  as  a  guest  of  the  potentate  whose  horse  is  being  devoured. 
We  note  that  on  this  side  there  are  fewer  figures  than  on  the 
opposite  side:  eight  men  —  three  on  horseback  —  a  lion,  and 
a  stag,  with  two  small  hunting  dogs.  The  Greeks  are  all  bare- 
headed. 

It  appears  that  Alexander  has  made  a  friend  of  some  oriental 
chief  of  such  noble  mien  that  he  must  be  royal.  It  is  to  him, 
perhaps,  that  the  sarcophagus  is  to  be  dedicated.  Abdalonymos 
of  Sidon  is  in  all  probability  the  person  who  here  attends  the  hunt 
and  who  is  selected  to  be  the  king  of  Sidon.  His  commanding 
presence  marks  him  as  the  future  possessor  of  this  royal  sarcopha- 
gus. He  is  also  the  chief  figure  on  one  of  the  short  sides,  where 
he  rides  down  with  his  spear  a  naked  Greek,  who  presents  a  shield 
against  the  rider.  We  seldom  see  such  a  splendid  nude  hoplite. 
Every  muscle  is  tense  and  brought  into  play.  On  either  side  of 
the  horseman  and  the  fallen  fighter,  a  shielded  and  helmeted 
hoplite  is  making  quick  work  of  his  antagonist.  The  one  to  the 
right  drives  his  straight  blade  down  into  the  back  of  the  fallen 
antagonist,  clutching  his  chin  with  his  left  hand.  The  whole 
weight  of  the  helmeted  man's  body  sinks  the  sword  to  the  hilt. 
One  shudders  at  the  sight.     On  the  opposite  end  another  hoplite, 


THE    FOURTH    l  EN  id  KV  245 

entirely  naked,  seems  about  to  slay  an  Asiatic  who  throws  ba<  k 
his  shield  and  hares  himself  to  the  slaughter. 

The  two  gables  remain  to  be  explained.  There  is  little  doubt 
that  in  the  gable  above  the  scene  of  the  slaughter  just  described,  we 

are  dealing  with  a  murder  rather  than  a  battle.  The  man  in  the 
centre  in  full  armour  has  just  given  the  <v///>  </<■  grdce  to  the  in  in 
who  is  falling  prostrate.  Of  the  two  adjacent  actors,  the  man 
to  the  left  is  delivering  a  second  stab,  while  the  other,  behind  the 
protagonist,  is  preventing  any  assistance  coming  to  tin-  falling 
man  from  that  quarter.  It  has  been  proposed  to  identify  this 
scene  with  the  murder  of  Perdiccas,  the  pretender  to  Alexander's 
inheritance.  It  is  probable  that  the  assassins  had  already  dealt 
with  the  fallen  hoplites  who  were  trying  to  help  their  chief.  In 
the  other  gable  an  oriental,  perhaps  the  oft-repeated  figure  in 
■  .  is  tr\  ing  to  ride  down  a  man  in  a  1  oat  of  mail  ;  a  similarly 
coated  man  lies  dead  in  the  left  corner.  In  the  right  corner  we 
see,  corresponding  to  this  fallen  man,  only  a  helmet  and  shield. 
The  motion  and  grouping  of  this  scene  is  the  only  weak  feature 
of  the  whole  dr.  oration  of  this  gorgeous  sar<  ophagus. 

A  chronological  study  of  the  four  sarcophagi  begins  with  that 
of  the  sitrap.  There  is  practical  unanimity  that  the  stiff  and 
semi-arch. ue   attitudes   compel   US  1  l  it   to  a  date   not  later 

than  450  b.c      l      re  is  a  Ion  still  to  travel  before  we  come 

to  the  '•  Ly<  ian  s  ir»  ophagus,"  which  1  an  hardly  be  much  later  than 
the  Parthenon  sculptures  j  and  tl  ophagus  of  the  "Weeping 

Women  ted  tO  the  best  work  of  the  early  part  of  the 

entury.     It  has  an  to  Praxiteles'  figures  on  the  base 

at  Mam  Finally  <  omes  the  mat<  hless  product  of  a  s<  ulptor 

td  oi    the  fourth   century.     Many   hands,  o(   1  lurse, 

wrought  the  wonder;    but  one  mind  duei  ted  the  work. 

Th(  proved  beyond    all   doubt  that  rel 

Uy  and   artistically  painted,     1  i  of  the 

practically  blank;    but  that  was  1  of  its  long 

I  he    next    in   tune,   the    |.\.  ian,   Bhi 
hromy.      Then  came  the  "Weeping   Women," 


246  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

in  which  paint  was  made  a  powerful  auxiliary  to  the  sculpture. 
But  when  we  come  to  the  Alexander  sarcophagus,  the  painter 
almost  outdoes  the  sculptor.  It  is  not  that  the  latest  monument 
of  the  group  was  the  most  highly  painted,  but  that  the  earlier  ones 
had  lost  much  of  the  paint  from  age  and  exposure.  The  satrap's 
sarcophagus  was  perhaps  not  so  strongly  painted  as  the  later  ones, 
though  here  also  the  painter  was  doubtless  called  in  to  supplement 
the  sculptor. 

No  one  can  stand  before  the  A'cxander  sarcophagus  as  it 
appears  in  the  imperial  Ottoman  Museum  at  Constantinople  with- 
out feeling  that  the  Greek  painter  went  hand  in  hand  with  the 
sculptor.  Here  are  the  usual  colours,  red,  blue,  and  yellow,  which 
have  always  been  the  prevailing  ones;  but  in  minor  details  the 
most  varied  shades  come  into  play.  And  now  the  sculptor  of 
reliefs  admits  that  paint  is  half  the  work.  The  controversy  has 
passed ;  all  that  we  now  have  to  say  is,  "  How  unerring  is  Greek 
taste  ! " 

Now  that  we  have  found  that  Lysippos'  faces  have  the  same 
deep-set  eye  as  those  of  Skopas,  we  may  ascribe  to  him  in  com- 
mon with  Skopas  the  unrest  which  appears  in  his  figures.  Prax- 
iteles moves  on  his  way,  quiet,  and  not  aspiring  to  the  loftiest 
realms,  presenting  Eros,  Aphrodite,  and  other  gentle  creations,  in- 
cluding "  mild  Hermes."  But  the  Titan,  Alexander,  has  crossed 
the  scene.  The  great  tides  of  thought  and  feeling  that  came  in 
with  him  are  now  to  be  reckoned  with.  He  passed  and  left  no 
man  to  carry  on  the  task  that  he  had  carved  out  to  be  done.  It 
is  true  that  some  who  tried  it  did  partially  succeed.  "  But  what 
can  he  do  that  cometh  after  the  king?  " 

We  now  pass  to  the  more  or  less  great  "  successors,"  and  in 
so  doing  we  reach  another  world  which  goes  under  the  name 
"  Hellenistic."     The  transition  is  not  violent,  but  it  is  real. 


THE   HELLENISTIC   AGE  247 

CHAPTER   V 
THE  HELLENISTIC  AGE,  323-146 BX.1 

Ls  I  C  glorious,  almost  superhuman,  art  ut"  the  fifth  century 
could  not  maintain  itself  under  changed  conditions,  it  naturally 
gave  way  to  that  of  the  fourth  century,  which  dealt  with  path<». 
The  beating  of  the  human  heart  was  felt.  It  was,  however,  the 
Hellenistic  Age  which,  beginning  toward  the  close  of  the  fourth 
century  and  continuing  to  the  period  of  Roman  domination,  146  B.C., 
spread  it>  art  over  Asia  Minor,  Egypt,  and  elsewhere.  Let  no  one 
dare  to  speak  disparagingly  of  that  art.  So  grand  are  some  of  its 
•lets  that  one  may  say  in  a  paradox  that  the  best  sculpture 
comes  after  the  best  period.  There  are  some  who  speak  out  with 
the   1  of  their  convictions  and  say,  "I  prefer   the   Apollo 

Belvedere,  the  Venus  di  Milo,  the   Dying  Caul,  the  Niobe  group, 
and  even  t  coon  -roup  and  the  Farnese  Hull  group  to  all 

that  has  gone  before."     And  who  shall  gainsay  them?     If  in  some 
of  ti  'in-  iii  iv  be  silenced  by  a  superior  critic,  what  s  1  ill 

be  said  of  the  headless  Nike  of  Samothrake?     [fshe  is  not  ureat, 
nothing  in  sculptui  reat.     The  beautiful  fifth-century  Nike  of 

■iios  is  feeble  beside  her.  And  what  shall  we  say  of  the  Per- 
gamon  s,  ulptures?  but  let  us  go  on  in  regular  order,  not  fearing 
that  we  are  dealing  with  second  or  third  rate  material. 

It  is  true  that  we  are  abandoning  in  some  measure  the  old 
haunts  of  sculpture.  V-  .  Athens,  and  Sikyon,  and  other  cele- 
brated res,  no  longer  produce  ;  but  other  art  centres  take 
their  pi  of  sculpture  arise  in  cities  once   of  little 

fralles,  and  Antioch.    The  Seleucid  Empire 
and  Egypt  produce  sculpture  that  is  not  to  be  depised. 

Niobe  Group.  —The  OUp,    the   origin    of    which   is   in 

doubt,   is    invested   with  a  pathos  which   strikes  a  new  chord. 
•   1  te  hum  in  heart  by  which  we  live"  is  seen  to  brat.     Mother, 

1  -| ;.  m.  lude  a  number  >■(  w..rks  whii  l>  display  the  Hel- 

I  irit,  ili>  i  latei  than  1  | 


248 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


daughter,  and  sister  show  intensity  of  love  in  death.  The  cold 
marble  is  warm  with  love  and  pity.  The  old  Pedagogue  forgets 
himself  in  his  anxiety  to  save  the  young  boy  in  his  charge.  Still 
more  touching  is  the  agonized  mother,  whose  only  thought  is  to 

protect  her  daughter  (Fig. 
117).  The  keenest  arrows 
are  those  that  pierce  her 
loved  ones. 

The  figures  representing 
the  Niobe  group  are  widely 
scattered.  That  they  come 
from  various  workshops  is 
evidenced  by  the  superior 
excellence  of  the  Niobid  in 
the  Vatican  over  that  in  the 
Uffizi,  and  by  that  of  the 
Pedagogue  in  the  Uffizi 
over  that  in  the  Louvre. 
This  picture  of  love  in 
death  makes  Apollo  and 
Artemis  appear  mean  and 
spiteful. 

Themis  of  Rhamnus.  — 
From  Rhamnus,  but  now  in 
the  museum  at  Athens,  we 
have  a  figure  of  Themis,  so 
august  that  she  seems  gaz- 
ing out  upon  us  from  long 
past  centuries  (Fig.  118).  She  might  stand  beside  the  great  works 
of  the  fifth  century  unabashed.  That  she  really  belongs  in  our 
period  is  indicated  by  the  chiton,  with  finest  wrinkles  girt  under 
her  breast.  Her  himation  in  broad  folds  is  dropped  low  enough 
to  show  the  high  girdle. 

From  Epidauros  comes  a  figure  much  akin  to  her,  but  the  hilt 
of  a  sword  in  her  hand  and  a  sword-strap  drawn  diagonally  across 


Fig.  117.  —  Niobe  protecting  her  Youngest 
Daughter.     (Florence,  Uffizi  Gallery.) 


VI  IK    111  1  I  ENIS1  [C   AGE 


249 


her  breast  mark  her  as  an  armed  Aphrodite.1  Her  chiton  is  only 
a  pretence  of  a  covering,  letting  the  nuances  of  the  sweet  body 
appear.  The  himation  falls 
from  her  left  shoulder,  envelop- 
ing her  limbs.  I.v  cpt  for  the 
battered  fa<  e  she  would  be 
itly  admired.  1  It  r  coiffure 
reminds  us  of  the  Lemnian 
Athena.  Her  spear  and  SWOrd- 
belt  are  only  for  show.  To  put 
them  on  such  creations  is  out  of 
place.  On  the  whole  she  i> 
a  Hellenistic  combination  ol 
Ye:  netrix  and  Venus  Vic- 

trix.  and  not  unworthy  to  be 
_  aped  with  the  more  august 
Themis  of  Rhamnus. 

Nike  of  Samothrake.  —  We 
now  pass  over  from  the  main- 
land to  some  of  the  islands, 
and  first  to  the  comparatively 
unimportant  isl  md,  Samothrake, 
in  the  northeast  corner  of  the 

gean,  noted  mainly  from  early 

times  for  the«  Lilt  of  the  Kabeiroi. 

( >n  this  island  the  gifted  and 
trr.it i<    -<>n   of  Antigonos,   I  >e 
metrios    Poliorketes,   set    up   a 

phy  for  a  naval  victory  « 
Pto  ind  proclaimed  him- 

self  king.      The   battle    was    fought    in    306    B.C.J    but    the    trophy 

1   some  six  or  more   years   later.     The  selection   oi 

m  iy  be  explained  not  only  by  its  high  cone,  prominent 

■ndconspi  maiai  but  by  the  cult  of  the  Kabeiroi    Demo 

1  Brunn-Brui  k«n*«n,  No.  14- 


Fig.  118.  —  Themis  from  Rhamnus. 
(Athens,  National  Museum.) 


250  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

trios,  it  is  true,  did  not  long  enjoy  his  triumph,  but  became  a 
vagabond,  alternately  rising  and  falling.  It  is  not  for  the  man 
and  his  fate  that  we  care  so  much,  as  for  the  trophy  which  he  left 
behind  him.  This  has  the  form  of  a  prow  of  a  ship  of  war  on 
which  stood  Nike  with  a  trumpet  at  her  lips,  sounding  out  to  the 
whole  world  the  triumph  of  Demetrios.  Not  only  do  we  have  it 
represented  on  a  large  silver  tetradrachm,  but  the  huge  prow 
itself,  somewhat  battered,  has  been  taken  to  the  Louvre,  and  the 
Nike  stands  upon  it  (Frontispiece).  She  is  without  head  or  arms, 
but  so  grand  is  her  attitude  that  we  hardly  miss  them.  The  on- 
ward rush  which  she  shares  with  the  rushing  trireme  makes  her 
one  of  the  finest,  one  might  almost  say  the  very  finest,  of  all  Greek 
sculptures.  It  is  the  action,  the  rush,  the  swing,  that  makes  the 
whole  effect.  We  regret  that  the  Nike  of  Paionios  at  Olympia 
has  lost  its  face ;  but  we  are  here  so  absorbed  in  the  action,  that 
we  hardly  miss  the  head,  which  is  usually  the  first  thing  that  we 
think  of  in  a  statue.  The  best  presentation  is  from  the  left  side, 
and  so  it  stands  as  one  approaches  it  in  the  Louvre.  It  is  worth  a 
whole  gallery  of  other  statues.  If  we  did  not  know  that  this 
splendid  piece  is  a  product  of  the  period  which  some  call  the 
period  of  decadence,  we  might  put  it  at  the  head  of  all  Greek 
sculptures.  The  three  Parthenon  sisters  have  their  glory  as  they 
tranquilly  sit,  leaning  in  easy  attitudes  one  upon  the  other.  They 
are  beautiful  in  their  repose  ;  but  the  Nike  of  Samothrake  repre- 
sents glorious  action.  The  upward  heaving  of  the  chest  and  right 
shoulder  is  unparalleled  in  any  sculpture  ;  and  the  twist  of  the 
abdominal  muscles  and  the  negligent  sweep  of  the  garments 
would  be  the  despair  of  a  modern  sculptor.  Paionios  and  other 
sculptors  of  the  fifth  century  might  well  hide  their  heads  before 
this  creation.  Only  on  the  Parthenon  gables  can  we  seek  its 
equal,  and  even  there,  among  those  august  gods  and  demigods, 
there  is  nothing  surpassing  this  power  in  action.  We  refuse  to 
believe  that  the  lost  head  of  the  Nike  of  Samothrake  could  be 
less  glorious  than  the  superb  body.  The  finish  also  is  worthy  of 
the  best  days  of  sculpture. 


THE    HE]  LENISTIC    AGE 


251 


It  is  vain  to  try  to  find  a  name  for  the  sculptor,  but  he  must 
have  been  3  Skopas.     How  cheap  seems  the  Nike  that 

Mummius  set  up  at  the  Hieron  of  Epidauros,  in  comparison  with 
thi>  noble  creation  1  As  we  read  on  the  marble  prow  the  proud 
Roman's  lines,  we  feel  an  insult  inflit  ted 
on  what  wa>  left  of  "  the  glory  that  was 
Greece 

Aphroditeof  Melos. —  There  were  other 
great  nameless  sculptors  who  carried 
aloiK  rand  style  beyond  the  fourth 

century.      Some  may  well   have  inherited 
this  from  a<  tu.il   contact  with   Skopa 

ppos.  I  "  Venus  <li  Milo  "  pre- 
sents unsolved  problems  regarding  her 
n,  but  we  need  only  to  touch  essen- 
tials. This  Aphrodite  was  discovered 
mt  on  the  island  of  Melos  in 
1820  while  he  w.is  seeking  for  building 
Stones.  Hard  by  was  a  theatre,  and  by 
a  lucky  stroke  the  upper  half  of  the 
statue  came  to  light.  A  young  marine 
on  a    French  er  <  ime  and   per- 

suaded   the  mt    to    continue    the 

work.    This  \\  n  rewarded  by  the 

findr  j  the    lower    half,   which    fitted 

the  upper.     1  >isc  ussions  long 
drawn  out  a->  to  the  <  in  umstani  es  of  the 
ry  of  the  statue  are  not  yet  ended, 
and  perhaps  never  will  end. 

This  stan.  ii',i  is  beyond  question  one  of  the  finest 

.  not  only  of  the  Louvre,  but  of  the  world.     It  has  the 

pei  fe<  t  head.    The  "  grand  Btyle"  is 
putably  before  us.     In  tin-,  the  Nike  of  Samothrake  and  the 
Aphi  iow  their  kinship.    The  Nike  shows  powerful  action, 

the  Apl  repose.     The  Nike  moves  on  with  a  trc 


Fig    119.      Aphrodite  <>i 
Melos.     ( I  lOuvre.) 


252  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

mendous  swing  which  drives  her  drapery  against  her  august  form. 
The  Aphrodite  has  in  common  with  the  Nike  the  raised  shoulder; 
but  with  the  Nike  it  is  the  right  shoulder  that  is  raised,  probably 
to  lift  a  trumpet,  while  in  the  Aphrodite  this  is  reversed.  The 
powerful  swing  of  the  whole  body  of  the  Nike  is  repeated  but 
toned  down  in  the  quiet  goddess  who  inclines  to  Eros  rather  than 
Eris.  She  is  not,  however,  the  shrinking  goddess  of  Praxiteles' 
creation.  She  controls  and  compels  by  her  quiet  dignity.  She  is 
Virgil's  Cytherea.  Her  drapery  is  wrapped  about  her  lower  limbs, 
her  left  leg  gently  bent  at  the  knee,  with  her  foot  raised  on  a 
slight  elevation,  thus  preventing  her  robe  from  falling  still  farther 
down.  The  magnificent  body  is  marked  by  large  nobility.  It 
is  Skopasian  rather  than  Praxitelean,  akin  to  the  Athena  in  the 
Uffizi.  There  is  a  close  resemblance  between  it  and  the  draped 
torso l  in  Copenhagen,  generally  regarded  as  an  Aphrodite.  The 
left  foot  of  the  Copenhagen  statue,  however,  is  raised  much  higher 
from  the  ground.  We  can  see  at  a  glance  that  the  Aphrodite 
of  Capua2  and  the  "Venus  di  Milo  "  are  variations  of  the  same 
type,  but  the  difference  between  them  is  wide  —  immensely  wide. 
When  one's  gaze  is  riveted  on  the  "  Venus  di  Milo,"  one  cares 
little  for  the  Capuan.  Her  sprawling  arms  detract  from  the  origi- 
nal, and  the  diadem  adds  nothing.  The  restored  hands  give  us 
no  certain  clue  to  their  original  position. 

Probably  there  have  never  been  so  many  attempts  at  restora- 
tion as  in  the  case  of  this  broken  but  august  statue.  Perhaps 
they  amount  to  more  than  a  hundred.  It  has  been  thought  that 
the  goddess  held  a  mirror,  and  this  perhaps  has  gained  most  of 
the  suffrages.  Closely  resembling  her  is  a  bronze  statue  in  Brescia,"' 
holding  a  round  tablet  and  probably  inscribing  on  it  the  names  of 
fallen  heroes,  which  has  been  misinterpreted  as  a  warrior  goddess. 

The  statue  in  the  Louvre  has,  perhaps,  been  the  subject  of 
more  controversy  than  any  other.  We  are  sure  that  at  one  time  it 
rested  partly  on  a  plinth  which  was  so  broken  on  its  left  side  that 

1  Reinach,  Repertoire,  ii.  338,  No.  3. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  297;   Von  Mach,  293.  3  Ibid.,  No.  299;   301. 


THE   III. I  1  ENISTIC   AGE 


-53 


all  that  now  remains  is  the  end  of  the  sculptor's  name  | — sandros) 
and  his  designation  as  from  Antioch  on  the   Maeander,  a  i  ity 

founded  in  a8i  B.C.  This  plinth  was  later  lost  or  removed,  pos- 
sibly "with  intent  to  suppress."  client  authorities  de(  Lire  that 
there  was  never  any  connection  between  the  plinth  and  the  Statue. 

This  Aphrodite,  seen  at  the  end  of  the  long  gallery,  matchless 
in  attitude  and  in  the  poise  of  its  noble  head,  fills  one  with  a  sense 

of  the  divine.  O,  dea  eerie/  

It  is  sometimes  given  to  an 
artist  to  see,  as  in  a  vision, 
a  form  grander  than  mortals. 
Pheidias  was  at  home  with 
such  glories,  and  even  an 
artist  of  the  Hellenistic  age 
could  commune  with  the 
greater  spirits  of  old. 

A  bronze  head1  in  the 
British  Museum,  found  at 
Erzindyan  in  Armenia,  is  a 
capital  example  of  the  Hel- 
lenistic spirit.  Collignon 
has     pronounced     it     Sko- 

rian,  but  apart  from  the 

n  mouth  it  seems  rather 

Pnuritelean.      The  bend  of 

the    neck,    and     the     hair, 

ecially   the   two  Inks   falling  below  the   part   on   the   forehead, 

mark  it  as  a  pro  lu<  t  of  the  I  [ellenistic  period.     We  may  associate 

with   it   a   female    head    |  Fig.    i  1  MIOU    in    Berlin,  in 

which   the  whole  expression  of  eyea  and   mouth  is  so  intense  as  to 

be  classed  as  Skopasian. 

Pergamon.  —We  now  come  to  the  sculptures  of  Pergaraon,1 

1  I'.rurm   I  I  20. 

■  Tl  re  Die  AUert&  >■  and  Pit  I 

dtr       .  '.■;//'• 


tao.      I  lead  from  Pergamon. 

m  Museum.) 


254  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

the  most  important  of  which  are  the  remains  of  the  frieze  of  the 
great  altar,  now  one  of  the  chief  treasures  of  art  in  the  Berlin 
Museum.  Pergamon  flourished  in  the  third  and  second  centuries 
B.C.,  and  by  careful  calculation  of  chances  pushed  its  way  through 
stronger  powers,  the  most  threatening  of  which  was  the  Seleucid 
kingdom.  Attalos  I  (241-197  b.c.)  for  nearly  a  half  century 
raised  the  kingdom  to  its  highest  pitch.  He  annihilated  the 
Gauls  who  attempted  to  overrun  Asia  Minor,  and  when  Antiochos 
III,  a  restless  warrior,  pressed  him  hard,  he  held  his  own  by  ally- 
ing himself  with  Rome.  When  Antiochos  was  crushed  at  Mag- 
nesia on  the  Hermos,  190  b.c,  there  came  the  great  days  for 
Pergamon.  Eumenes  II,  successor  and  son  of  Attalos  I,  reigned 
nearly  forty  years,  and  not  only  somewhat  enlarged  his  ter- 
ritory at  the  expense  of  the  Seleucids,  but  completed  and 
beautified  a  noted  citadel.  At  the  death  of  Attalos  III  in 
133  b.c.  Pergamon  was  bequeathed  to  Rome  and  ceased  its  high 
career. 

Attalos  I,  in  memory  of  his  victory  over  the  Gauls  and  their 
confinement  to  the  heart  of  Asia  Minor,  set  up  trophies.  Since 
he  was  a  Greek  and  devoted  to  Greek  culture,  his  first  thought 
was  to  make  his  great  exploit  known  at  Athens  by  tokens  which 
took  the  form  of  art,  groups  of  bronze  statues  representing  Greeks 
victorious  over  barbarians.  About  201  B.C.  he  visited  Athens  while 
his  laurels  were  fresh  upon  him,  and  presented  to  the  "  mother 
of  arts  "  his  token  of  regard.  How  patronizing  to  Athens  these 
Macedonians  were  !  Athens  was  kindly  treated  in  proportion  to 
its  innocuousness.  These  bronze  statues  of  small  size  are,  as  a 
matter  of  course,  gone  forever.  One  of  them  was  blown  down 
from  the  south  wall  of  the  Akropolis  in  a  gale.  Bronze  was  a 
much-coveted  material  and  quickly  disappeared,  being  beaten  into 
weapons  of  war  and  other  objects.  But  by  good  fortune  marble 
copies  remain  to  show  what  the  originals  were  like.  In  the  Naples 
Museum  a  dead  Gaul  lies  on  his  ponderous  shield.1  His  sword 
falls  from  his  nerveless  hand.  His  fierce  eye  and  unkempt  hair 
1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  Nos.  481,  482;  Von  Mach,  262,  263,  264. 


THE    111  I  I  ENISTIC    AGE 


-55 


mark  the  untamed  sa\   .  ,     What  a  contrast  to  a  Greek  athlete ! 
Much  less  barbaric  and  fierce  arc  other  figures.     One,  whose 

trousers    mark    him    as   a    Persian,    is   already   dead.      Another    is 
ably  a  Gaul,  holding  himself  up  as  long  as  his  arms  will  sup- 
port him.    An  Amazon,  one  of  tho>t-  figures  condemned  to  lie 
Itiful  even   in  death,  has  let  her  broken  spear  tall  by  her  side, 
the  right  leg  drawn  up  convulsively. 

e  of   the    most    familiar    figures   in   sculpture    is    the    statue 
Formerly  misnamed  "  Dying  Gladiator,"  now  known  as  the  "  Dying 


121.  —  v  -ma  Dyi  i  Rome,  <  lapiloline  Museum.) 

Gaul"  (Fig.  121  i.  The  Capitoline  Museum  has  few  sculptures 
that  can  vie  with  it.  This  Gaul  has  fought  to  the  'hath,  and 
the  life  blood  is  flowing  from  a  ghastly  wound  not  self-inflicted.1 

tiff  1"<  ks,  like  a  rough  mane,  are  bowing  earthward.      1  lis  arms 
ippoit    him.      Mother    earth    will    receive    him.      It    is 

stra:  •    he   was   called    the  "Dying   Gladiator"    when  he 

n   identified  by  the  torque  around  his  nn  k  and  his 

i  it  i  thai  the  ( r*ul  b  v.n  himself  the 

•lit  to  th  .      ■    •  ii        ' 


256  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

long  curved  horn.  In  the  Louvre1  is  another  figure  not  brought  so 
low  as  the  Dying  Gaul.  Wounded  in  the  left  thigh,  he  still  fights. 
In  absence  of  fierce  resistance  we  should  have  had  mere  butchery. 
Finally  we  have  a  scene  from  the  same  conflict  in  which  a  Gaul,2 
seeing  that  his  consort  has  nothing  but  slavery  before  her,  has 
slain  her,  and  now  holding  her  by  her  left  arm  he  drives  his  stout 
short  sword  downward  into  his  own  breast  with  a  force  that  makes 
the  blood  spurt  out.  It  is  possible  that  we  have  in  a  warrior  from 
Delos 3  another  figure  connected  with  the  Pergamene  figures.  The 
shape  of  the  helmet  by  his  side  is  like  those  sculptured  on  the 
trophies  at  Pergamon.  This  is  probably  a  Greek  who  fights  with 
some  chance  of  victory,  since  he  fights  from  behind  a  shield. 
Thus  we  have  a  solitary  example  of  a  victor  in  the  fight. 

The  most  impressive  feature  of  Pergamon  was  its  akropolis. 
Going  from  the  city  at  its  foot  to  the  top,  one  climbs  nearly  a 
thousand  feet.  This  comparatively  transient  kingdom  made  the 
mountain  into  an  akropolis  such  as  was  never  seen  elsewhere.  Its 
excavation  by  the  German  Archaeological  Institute  conducted  by 
Professor  Dorpfeld  during  more  than  ten  years,  in  continuation  of 
previous  excavations  carried  on  by  the  Berlin  Museum,  is  one  of  the 
greatest  achievements  of  our  time.  The  akropolis  was  flanked  by 
the  river  Ketios  on  the  east  and  the  Selinus  on  the  west,  both  of 
which  soon  flow  into  the  Kaikos.  From  the  summit  the  sight  is 
one  never  to  be  forgotten.  One  sees  the  sea  eight  or  ten  miles  dis- 
tant. On  the  south  is  the  broad  plain,  with  the  Kaikos.  On  the 
north  only  is  the  view  somewhat  limited.  In  such  a  setting  was 
Pergamon.  But  it  is  the  jewel  itself  that  interests  us.  Leaving  the 
lower  area  where  the  city  once  stood,  we  wind  our  way  up  and  enter 
the  akropolis  at  its  lowest  point.  We  then  climb  up  past  gymnasia 
and  enter  a  broad  area  surrounded  by  porticoes.  This  is  the 
market-place.  Another  rise  brings  us  to  the  great  Altar  of  Zeus, 
which  affords  the  chief  interest  of  the  place.  If  we  go  farther,  we 
shall  pass  other  terraces,  the  next  being  the  precinct  of  Athena 

1  B.C.//.  13  (1889),  PI.  1.  2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  422. 

8  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  9 ;  Von  Mach,  287. 


THE    HELLENISTIC    AGE 


;57 


with  its  temple  foundations.  On  the  upper  side  of  this  is  another 
porch,  and  beyond  this  was  the  far-famed  library  of  I'ergamon, 
rivalling  that  of  Alexandria.  Still  higher  up  were  the  temple  of 
Trajan  and  the  royal  palace. 

To  the  left  one  looks  down  on  a  theatre,  cut  into  the  western 
flank  of  the  mountain,  which  is  extremely  steep.  Only  a  gigantic 
terrace  wall  holds  it  from  sliding  down  into  the  Selinus.  We  dis- 
miss details  as  superfluous  for  our  immediate  purpose,  ami  con- 
fine ourselves  to  the  great  Altar  of  Zeus,  which  faced  to  the  west 
and  overlooked  the  gigantic  terrace. 

Karl  Hum. inn,  an  engineer,  got  possession  in  1873  of  some 
fragments  of  the  relief*. ;  and  five  years  later  the  Germans  began 
the  excavations,  which  with  interruptions  continued  for  many 
\e.ir>.  By  the  liberality  of  the  Porte  the  German  government 
allowed  to  take  possession  of  the  finds  and  transport  them  to 
Berlin. 

The  altar  was  practically  square,  of  one  hundred  feet  to  each 
side,  with  a  broad  si  rin  ase  cut  into  the  west  side,  which  took  up 
three  fifths  of  its  breadth.  The  structure  was  forty  feet  high. 
ulptured  band  of  colossal  figures  in  extreme  relief,  about 
seven  feet  high,  encircled  the  building  on  three  sides  ;  but  when  it 
turned  the  two  front  <  orners,  it  ran  up  the  stairs  and  ended  at  the 
top  in  a  sharp  point  with  a  serpent  and  an  eagle.  ()n  the  plat- 
form to  which  the  stain  ase  led  up  was  the  real  altar.  A  splen- 
did Ionic  colonnade  encircled  it,  and  the  sa<  red  lire  burned  in 
the  <  >f  it.     A  smaller  frieze,  on  the  inside  of  the  great  en- 

closure served  as  a  parapet,  and  bore  the  story  of  Telephos,  but 
this  is  -o  badly  broken  that  its  artistic  value  is  nearly  gone.  This 
enclosure  <»  <  upies  about  two  thirds  of  the  -nil  >.|iiare,  the  stair- 
case with  the  colonnade  at  the  top  occupying  the  rest. 

Th(  d  figures  of  the  outside  frieze  have  drawn  the  atten- 

tion of  the  world,    (bants  with  legs  ending  it)  serpents'  tails,  and 
•  .Ms  wings,  doubtless  gave  rise  among  the  early  Christians 

to  the  belief  th  it  here  dd  ils  were  portrayed,  and  for  th.it  reason  this 

lertul  building  is  probably  referred  to  in  Revelations  ii.  13  as 

-  '7 


258  GREEK  SCULPTURE 

"Satan's  Seat."  We  see  with  what  zeal  the  Christian  iconoclasts 
hammered  these  figures  until  hardly  a  face  is  left  complete.  It  is, 
therefore,  an  immense  help  in  interpreting  them  that  the  names 
are  carved  on  the  borders,  those  of  the  gods  above  and  those  of 
the  giants  below.  All  the  greater  gods  are  present,  and  we  are 
introduced  to  many  more  whose  names  are  strange. 

We  begin  here  with  great  Zeus,  near  the  centre  of  what  we 
may  call  the  chief  battle,  in  which  the  figures  are  in  considerable 
measure  preserved.  His  garment  hampers  him  somewhat  in  the 
action  ;  but  this  displays  the  god.  The  battle  is  for  no  single 
instant  doubtful.  On  each  side  of  him  is  a  fallen  antagonist.  On 
the  left  a  blazing  thunderbolt  has  scorched  and  annihilated  an 
antagonist  —  a  giant  who  thought  to  grapple  with  great  Zeus! 
The  fiery  prongs  of  the  forked  thunderbolt  have  pierced  him 
through  and  through.  The  mighty  king  of  the  celestial  gods 
bares  his  chest  as  he  draws  back  his  raised  right  arm  to  smite 
down  another  giant,  who  falls  before  him.  The  giant  who 
has  dared  to  enter  the  lists  against  Zeus  has  already  sunk  to 
the  earth  on  his  knees  before  the  second  bolt  has  reached  him. 
The  mere  sight  of  great  Zeus  has  crushed  his  foe.  But  farther  to 
the  right  is  the  real,  the  doughty  champion  of  the  giants,  bearded 
and  fierce.  His  buckler  is  the  skin  of  some  wild  animal,  which  he 
has  wound  around  his  arm.  His  legs  end  in  scaly  coils.  He  is 
now  troubled  by  the  eagle,  but  his  one  object  is  to  grapple  with 
Zeus,  who  has  smitten  down  his  two  comrades.  He  it  is  who  dares 
most,  since  he  meets  the  father  of  gods  and  men.  Muscular 
strength  and  "  courage  never  to  submit  or  yield  "  is  depicted  in 
the  giant's  wild  face  and  dishevelled  hair ;  but  vain  are  all  the 
attempts  of  this  wild  and  untamed  creature  when  Zeus  is  near  ! 
All  his  attacks  and  defences  are  but  "sound  and  fury."1 

Another  group  of  four  figures  (Fig.  122)  vies  in  excellence 
and  power  with  the  one  just  presented.     Here  we  see  Athena,  the 

1  This  group  shows  how  thoroughly  the  Christians  had  done  their  work. 
The  faces  had  boen  carefully  hammered  away  except  the  giant's  head,  which, 
being  in  profile  and  not  so  high  relief,  was  neglected  and  escaped. 


THE    1111  1  ENISTIC    AGE 


259 


favourite  daughter  of  Zeus,  with  her  aegis  on  her  breast,  "delight- 
ing in  battle/1  moving  with  a  grand  sweep  to  the  right  a<  ross  the 
field,  carrying  death  and  destruction  as  she  passes.  At  this  mo- 
ment she  seizes  by  the  hair  a  naked,  young,  and  beardless  giant 
with  win--.  He  has  already  felt  the  terrible  presence.  His  lin- 
gers clasped  around  the  forearm  of  the  goddess  are  relaxing,  and 


j^r* 1 

^£1? 

s 

bsBSf 

\ 

*&l 

^^^ 

u2<^  jj. 

:  i  :d  Museum.  1 

he  fall-  to  his  mother  earth,  the  death  agony  on  his  fare.  But 
on  the  right  of  Athena  ris  Ge,  mother  earth,  who  in  agony  for 
her  child  stretches  out  her  right  hand  as  if  to  reach  her  son's  left, 
at  tl.  ne  appealing  to  the   pitiless   goddess.     We  have 

path*  xtremes.    The  central  figure  of  Athena  clothed 

with  hei  I  bearing  a  round  shield  is  as  (rigorous  as  that 

of  Zeus.     Bui  she    n  th  less  effort.     Her  Bweep  is  easy. 

On  ■  right  a  winged   Nike  comes  rushing  upon  the 

nd   places  a  wreath  of  victory  on  Athena's  head.     The 
pitih  ■•  remorseh    >ly  on  their  nraj  s  the  field. 

Ony  m  the  feces  Of  mother  and  <  lnld  almost 

to  win  ■  to  th.-  side  of  the  wild  forces  thai  are  arrayed 

ther  /' 


260  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

We  have  here  mentioned  the  two  principal  groups,  in  which  Zeus 
and  Athena  are  predominant ;  but  there  are  other  groups  of  hardly 
less  interest.  Apollo,  reduced  almost  to  a  torso,  is  slaying  with  his 
arrows  right  and  left.  The  triple  Hecate  is  singeing  with  a  torch  a 
giant  whose  legs  end  in  serpents'  coils,  on  one  of  which  a  dog  has 
fastened  his  teeth.  Behind  her  a  nude  warrior,  armed  with  helmet 
and  shield,  marked  as  Otos,  strides  proudly  to  the  right  to  meet 
Artemis,  while  between  them  is  a  giant  of  the  usual  form,  with  legs 
ending  in  serpents.  Otos  is  a  noble  figure,  but  the  goddess  Ar- 
temis confronts  him  and  he  must  fall.  Even  the  effeminate 
Dionysos,  supported  by  two  Satyrs,  draws  back  his  right  arm  to 
deliver  a  telling  blow.  Amid  all  this  mortal  agony  there  is  a  deli- 
cate touch  when  Selene,  riding  side-saddle  on  a  spirited  horse  with 
a  lion's  skin  thrown  over  it,  passes  swiftly  along  with  her  cloak 
fallen  to  her  hips.  This  splendid  body,  with  its  clinging  folds  girt 
just  below  the  breast,  is  a  vision  of  beauty  in  the  midst  of  a  rag- 
ing battle.  The  damage  to  the  face,  which  is  in  profile,  is  a  loss 
indeed. 

There  are  several  aspects  of  this  remarkable  frieze  to  be  taken 
into  account.  We  turn  back  to  the  ancient  gable  figures  of  the 
treasury  of  the  Megarians  at  Olympia,  which  were  some  four  hun- 
dred years  older  than  this  altar ;  and  we  find  the  same  old  theme 
of  the  battle  between  the  gods  and  giants.  But  how  changed  ! 
The  display  of  force  is  the  same,  and  that  is  all.  The  pathos, 
of  which  we  had  touches  in  Skopas  and  Lysippos,  has  now  gone 
on  to  excess.  Relief  sculpture  has  none  of  the  repose  of  the 
fifth  century.  To  a  sculptor  of  that  time  the  great  frieze  would 
have  seemed  a  travesty  of  art.  The  sculpture  of  Attalos  had 
some  restraint,  but  the  reliefs  of  the  great  altar  are  divorced  from 
the  principle  of  relief.  The  figures  stand  out  practically  inde- 
pendent of  background.  We  are  rapidly  approaching  Roman 
pictorial  art. 

It  is  only  in  comparatively  recent  times  that  these  sculptures 
have  found  their  final  lodgement.  In  the  last  years  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  they  were  lying  on  the  floor  of  a  storehouse  of  the 


I  HI      lll'.l.l  1  AIM  [C    AGE  261 

Berlin  Museum.  Bui  at  last  they  have  been  properly  placed  in 
a  new  Museum.  A  reproduction  of  the  altar  was  set  up,  and 
the  fragments  of  the  relief,  as  t.ir  as  they  were  preserved,  adjusted. 

Of  course  much  is  larking,  and  it  is  only  by  untiring  efforts  that 
such  a  noble  monument  of  a  dying  civilization  has  been  brought 
before  us.  The  altar  is  reproduced  in  a  museum  by  itself,  but 
the  broad  staircase  is  reduced  to  two  narrow  ones  on  each  side. 

The  whole  altar  is  enclosed  under  a  glass  roof. 

(  »f  the  smaller  frieze,  which  probably  had  its  place  on  the  inside 
of  the  colonnade  which  rests  on  the  high  base,  there  are  mam  frag- 
ments, some  incomplete  and  others  so  mutilated  that  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  gather  much  more  than  the  subject,  which  seems  to  represent 
the  story  of  Telephos,  the  legendary  hero  of  Pergamon  and  son 
of  Heraklesand  Auge,  the  unfaithful  priestess  at  Tegea.  The  story 
is  indeed  .u\  interesting  one,  but  the  sculptures  are  not  only  of  in- 
ferior workmanship,  but  badly  broken.  A  single  exception  may 
be  made  in  the  case  of  Herakles  finding  the  infant  Telephos  on 
Mt.  Parthenios,  suckled  by  a  hind. 

It  is  sometimes  questioned  whether  we  can  properly  speak  of 

a  Pergamene  art  rather  than  Asiatic  art,  and   although    Pergamon 

has  given  us  the  best  of  its  kind  we  may  perhaps  enroll  its  art  with 

that  which   began   to  show  itself  in   the  whole   Aegean   basin.      It 

red    by  in  who  rose  and  fell  with  varying  fortunes. 

Tm    Rhodian  School.    Thi    I  mxxxjn  Group 

Rhodes,  once  a  leader  in  am  ient  art,  especially  in  pottery,  had 
already  in  the  seventh  century  b.<  .,  and  even  earlier,  a  brilliant  1  a- 
reer.  But  if  in  the  Hellenistic  period  much  was  1  hanged,  Rhodes 
no  mean  city  in  the  second  centurj  B.C  It  even  rose  to 
eminence.  When  Demetrios  Poliorketes  attacked  the  city,  the 
st.m<  h  citizens  came -out  of  th<  ,  not  only  with  honour,  but 

with  glory.     Then,  like  Pergamon,  Rhodes  took  sides  against  An- 
and  Philip  V.     In  the  war  against   Perseus  it 
lost  all  it-  Asiatic  p  .  but  by  standing  firm  against  Mithri- 


262  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

dates,  in  88  B.C.,  it  gained  the  favour  of  Rome.  The  short  interval 
of  forty-five  following  years  was  brilliant ;  but  Rome  was  already 
supreme  and  high  art  was  at  an  end.  The  Rhodian  school,  it  is  true, 
"had  a  name  to  live,"  as  one  sees  from  the  list  of  sculptors  from 
Halikarnassos,  Soloi,  Chios,  Antioch,  and  Laodicea.1 

The  colossos  of  Rhodes,  a  work  of  Chares,  was  one  of  the  Seven 
Wonders  of  the  World,  but  it  perished  early  and  passed  into  the 
land  of  fable.  There  were  no  tangible  remains  of  the  Rhodian 
school  until  in  1506  a  group  was  found  near  San  Pietro  in  Vincoli 
at  the  foot  of  the  Esquiline;  representing  Laocodn  and  his  two  sons 
strangled  by  serpents  (Fig.  123).  It  was  at  once  identified  with 
the  work  of  the  three  masters  of  the  Rhodian  school  —  Agesander, 
Polydoros,  and  Athenodoros  —  mentioned  by  Pliny.2 

The  story  so  often  told  that  such  and  such  figures  were  made  of 
a  single  block  is  here  repeated  for  the  delectation  of  those  who  en- 
joy the  marvellous.3  Pope  Julius  II  got  possession  of  the  group, 
and  it  found  its  way  into  the  Vatican  collection,  where  it  remains. 
It  has  been  treated  as  one  of  the  world's  greatest  wonders.  It  is 
no  small  matter  that  Winckelmann  gave  it  enthusiastic  praise,  and 
that  Lessing  made  it  the  starting  point  of  his  theory  of  aesthetics  in 
his  "  Laokoon." 

But  now  that  we  have  gained  the  proper  perspective  we  have 
learned  to  estimate  the  value  of  the  fulsome  praises  bestowed  on 
the  sculptures  of  the  age  of  decline.  If  Lessing  had  seen  the 
Parthenon  sculptures,  he  would  not,  perhaps,  have  taken  the  La- 
ocoon  group  as  his  starting  point  of  a  theory  of  aesthetics.  In  fact 
he  did  not  realize  that  it  belonged  to  the  period  of  decline.  —  Pain 
and  agony  are  here  paraded  and  carried  to  extremes.  One  revolts 
against  the  cruel  god  who  has  brought  all  this  suffering  upon  a 
righteous  man.  Laocoon  has  no  time  to  debate  like  Job.  But  he 
must  feel  that  he  who  sent  the  terrible  serpents  was  more  a  demon 
than  a  reasonable  god.  The  whole  world  pities  the  father  who  tries 
to  protect  his  city  and  then  his  sons,  and  for  3  return  has  had 

1  Loewy,  Insc.  Griech.  Bildh.  127,  No.  159-205. 

2  Pliny,  36.  37.  3  Pliny,  36.  34,  accepts  this  story. 


264  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

inflicted  upon  him  the  most  terrible  of  tortures.  We  see  that  the 
younger  son,  to  the  left,  has  already  succumbed.  The  father's 
suffering  is  so  great  that  he  no  longer  realizes  that  this  son  is  dead, 
crushed  in  the  coils  of  the  serpents,  nor  does  he  see  the  chances 
that  the  elder  son  has  of  escaping.  He  reveals  in  every  fibre  of 
his  body  the  extreme  of  physical  agony  made  even  sharper  by  the 
thought  of  his  sons.  The  real  worker  of  the  calamity  is  unseen. 
Laocoon  was  both  upright  and  prudent,  and  yet  he  perished 
miserably  with  his  younger  son,  who  succumbs  before  the  father. 
It  is  not  improbable  that  it  is  intended  that  the  elder  son,  on  the 
right,  should  still  have  a  chance  for  his  life.  On  the  face  of  La- 
ocoon, especially  in  the  eyes,  pity  and  terror  are  seen  in  most 
acute  form.  In  unison  with  the  suffering  face,  which  might  readily 
be  compared  to  that  of  the  crucified  one  on  the  cross,  we  behold 
every  muscle  in  terrible  strain.  He  is  indeed  forsaken.  Falling 
backwards  upon  the  altar  on  which  he  sacrificed,  with  his  priestly 
robe  fallen  from  him,  we  see  him  stricken  down  while  engaged  in 
his  priestly  duties.  Instead  of  mother  and  son,  as  on  the  Pergamene 
frieze,  we  have  the  more  human  father  and  sons  crushed,  annihi- 
lated by  the  pitiless  serpents.  The  pathos  in  both  groups  is  alike 
deep.  In  the  Laocoon  group  the  greater  gods  and  giants  are 
lacking ;  but  just  such  pain  and  pathos  as  we  saw  in  the  youthful 
giant  at  Pergamon,  struck  down  by  the  pitiless  goddess,  we  here 
behold  in  increased  degree.  The  giant  finds  a  parallel  in  the 
Laocoon. 

The  striking  similarity  of  the  Laocoon  to  the  figures  on  the 

great  altar  at  Pergamon  show  that  the  group  cannot  be  earlier 

than  the  altar;  and  inscriptions1  containing  the  names  of  Age- 

sander,  Polydoros,  and  Athenodoros  show  that  they  lived  in  the 

I  second  half  of  the  first  century  B.C. 

We  must  note  here  that  the  group  has  been  badly  treated  by 
the  "  restorers."  There  is  no  doubt  that  it  was  in  the  form  of  a 
pyramid.  Laocoon's  right  arm  should  be  bent  so  as  to  rest  upon 
his  head,  and  the  same  should  be  said  of  the  younger  son  on  the 

1  See  A./.A.  10  (1906),  101. 


THE    HKI.I  ENISTIC    AG!  165 

left.  Here  the  "  restorer  "  appears  in  his  most  odious  guise.  Hut 
if  the  figure  of  Laocoon  has  been  disfigured,  it  is  far  more  shameful 
that  the  dramatists,  and  among  them  Sophokles,  have  maligned 

him  and  traduced  his  character. 

Tm    Farni  se  Bui  i   Group 

Still  remaining  in  the  Asiatic  school  or  schools,  we  pass  from 
the  Laocobn  to  a  kindred  pie<  e  of  sculpture,  and  one  equally  pa- 
thetic. It  is  also  in  like  manner  p)  ramidal  in  form,  but  is  even  more 
ostentatious  than  the  Laocoon  group.  The  sculptors  of  this  group 
were  from  Tralles,  and  were  brothers,  Apollonios  and  Tauriskos,  fully 
imbued  with  that  ostentation  which  marks  the  Asiatic  school.  The 
group  was  originally  set  up  at  Rhodes,  but  was  c  irried  off  by  Cassius 
at  the  pillage  of  that  city,  43  B.i  .  After  sixteen  centuries  it  came 
in  in  the  baths  of  Caracalla,  sadly  mutilated.  It  was 
restored  and  placed  in  the  Farnese  Pala<  e,  but  was  finally  removed 
to  the  Naples  Museum,  where  it  is  a  cynosure  to  all  who  admire 
big  and  flashy  sculptures. 

We  have  here  represented  (Fig.  1  24  1  a  cruel  scene.  Zethos  and 
Amphion,  the  Theban  heroes,  sons  of  Antiope,  are  taking  vengeance 
on  their  stepmother,  Dirke,  for  her  1  ruelty  to  their  mother.  (  )ur 
first  thought  is  of  the  cruel  fate  of  Dirke,  because  she  is  beautiful 
and  is  now  about  to  be  dragged  to  a  merciless  death  at  the  hands 
of  the  unrelenting  youths.  It  is  a  sight  at  which  we  revolt,  not 
only  because  the  stout  brothers  hive  chosen  a  terribly  cruel 
manner  of  taking  their  vengeance,  but  because  it  is  wreaked  upon 
a  del  w  woman.    The  prancing  bull  is  only  an  instrument. 

He  will  do  his  conscienceless  work.  The  youths  are  indeed  as 
the  wild  bull  himself.  Every  muscle  is  brought  to 
■  on  th-  work.     If  anything  could  turn   the  feelinj      I 

righteous  oce     into     the     dcepc  I  n,    it    would 

of  Antiope1  on  the  right,  gloating  over  her  rival's 
death-agon)  tading  her  a  to  the  torment.     Retribution 

1  Seen  in  Brann  Brncknutnn,  No. 


268 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


strike  an  unguarded  foe  who  should  be  rash  enough  to  take  the 
offensive.  But  probably  there  never  was  a  foe.  It  was  a  pose  for 
a  fight  and  nothing  more.  The  sculptor  has  left  his  name  on  the 
tree  trunk.  He  is  Agasias,  the  son  of  Dositheos,  the  Ephesian. 
The  letters  are  those  of  the  first  century  b.c.  The  face  of  the 
warrior  shows  the  stern  joy  of  battle ;  it  is  forceful,  but  on  the 

whole  vulgar,  as  we 
should  expect  from  an 
attitude  of  mere  show 
of  anatomical  excel- 
lence. We  may  praise 
the  show  piece  because 
it  is  excellently  done, 
but  beyond  that  we 
cannot  go.  Not  so 
did  Harmodios  and 
Aristogeiton  pose. 
Collignon,  following 
Visconti,  believes  that 
we  should  here  recos;- 
nize  a  man  actually 
fighting  a  horseman 
and  covering  himself 
with  a  shield  while  he 
looks  upward,  with  his 
gaze  intent  upon  an 
antagonist  who  is  about 
to  ride  him  down.  The 
condottiere  of  the  time  is  here  pictured  as  forceful  but  vulgar,  as 
is  often  the  case  with  the  soldier  by  profession.  Such  a  man 
often  sweeps  the  spectator  along  with  him.  A  swift  transforma- 
tion is  now  coming  over  the  world.  Rome  will  soon  call  for  her 
gladiators,  and  they  will  be  made  of  such  stuff. 


Fig.  125. —Apollo  Belvedere.     (Rome,  Vatican.) 


THE    HELLENISTIC     AGE 


269 


The  Apollo  Belvedere  and  the  Artemis  of  Versailles 

The  statue  called  the  Apollo  Belvedere  (Fig.  125),  because  it 
stands  in  that  part  oi  the  Vatican  which  commanded  a  fine  view 
over  Rome,  teas  for  a  long  time  considered  as  the  beau  ideal  of 
sculpture,  nor  Deed  we 

now  regard  it  slight- 
ingly, because  it  may 
be  of  a  somewhat  late 
period.  It  has  been 
thought  to  have  kin- 
ship with  the  Perga- 
mene  sculptures,  and 
even  with  the  llorghese 
warrior.  It  has  been 
perhaps  almost  as  much 
admired  as  the  "Venus 
di  Milo."  It  is  true 
that  the  god  is  posing. 
But  the  pose  is  splendid. 
There  is  no  doubt  that 
the  archer  god  has  just 
let  fly  an  arrow.  I'urt- 
wiingler,  after  long 
deliberation,  declared 
with  Winter1  that  the 
\  'llo  is  a  copy  of  a 
work  by  Leochares. 
The  connoisseurs  have- 
in     l.ir 

9  the  true  one.  that   the  Apollo 

work.     The  ■  i  was  doubtless  more  superb  than  the 

copy,  vet  we  admire  the  splendid  pose  when  the  eye  follows  the 

.v  just  released,  speeding   to   the    m.irk,  which    is   probably 

I   M.n/,  >fu  /ahrbuJi,  7  (1S92),   \'\ 


Fig.  126.  —  Artemis  <>:  '  '•     ivre.) 


272 


GREEK   SCULPTURE 


FIG.  127. —  Poseidon  of  Melos.     (Athens,  National  Museum.) 


THE    HELLENIST]  tC    AGE  273 

The  Barberini  Faun1  is  a  great  hulk  sunken  in  a  drunken  stu- 
por, tumbled  back  on  a  convenient  rock,  which  suffices  to  show 
his  absolute  collapse  and  inability  to   sit  or  even  stand.     How 

his  head  seeks  the  left  shoulder!  The  Hermes  of  Andros-  with 
the  Praxitelean  S,  a  rather  noble  figure,  is  much  superior  to  the 
Melian  Poseidon.  His  downcast,  thoughtful  look  has  been  sup- 
1  to  mark  him  as  belonging  to  a  funereal  group.  The  belve- 
dere Hermes  '  in  the  Vatican  i-.  almost  a  duplicate. 

We  now  deal  in  personifications  which  grew  up  in  the  times  of 
the  Diado*  hi.  Eutychides,  a  pupil  oi  Lysippos,  carved  an  image 
of  the  "  Fortune  of  Antioch."*  The  whole  represents  a  city  set  on 
a  rocky  hill.  The  figure  sits  upon  a  rock  and  re^ts  her  left  hand 
upon  it.  On  her  head  is  a  mural  crown.  Her  foot  rests  on  the 
shoulder  of  a  youth,  representing  the  (lowing  river.  The  seated 
goddess  bears  a  sheaf  of  wheat,  typifying  the  prosperity  of  the 
great  city.  Her  attitude  is  superb.  Dignity  and  pride  are  un- 
mistakable, as  befitted  Antioch.  The  maker  of  the  pediment 
•s  of  the  Parthenon  would  doubtless  have  called  this  carrying 
symbolism  too  fir. 

We  may  note  in  passing  several  nude  Aphrodites,  which  are 
enough  akin  to  fall  into  a  group,  ["here  is  a  headless  nude  figure 
crouching  in  the  bath,  found  at  Vienne.'  Akin  to  her  is  the 
famous  Venus  dei  Medici8  in  Florence,  in  which  all  sentiment  of 
modesty  has  vanished.  The  sweet  afflatus  of  divinity  too  i^  gone, 
ter  i^   the  dancing    Maenad  in  Berlin.7    The  upward 

lifting  of  the  right  shoulder  shows  the  splendid  full  forms.      For  the 

rest  the  drapery  om-h  her  completely  down   to  her  beautiful  feet. 

Somewhat  akin   to  the  Vienne  figure   in   the   adjustment  ot   the 

> Brunn-Bruckmann,  No    is;  Von  Mach,  191. 

1      "   •  '  '~-  737- 
*  Urunn-Brui  kmann,  No.  1 5  y. 

\rt  antiqut,  PL  q  >  ;    Reinach,  A  .  ii.  370, 

37«- 

-  (;    Von  M.i'  h,  -• 

ttradonil  h.  Skulptur, 


276  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

altar  in  front  of  the  temple  of  Neptune  erected  in  Rome  about 
35-32  B.C.  by  Domitius  Ahenobarbus. 

A  statue  in  bronze,  found  in  the  sea  near  Antikythera  in  1900, 
has  been  much  discussed  (Fig.  129).  It  was  one  of  a  whole  ship- 
load of  statues  collected  probably  for  the  journey  to  Rome.  This 
statue  has  lost  some  of  its  value  from  the  treatment  given  it  by 
Andre,  the  French  restorer,  who  subjected  the  whole  surface  to 
a  sort  of  restoration  after  the  antiquated  fashion.  The  scraping 
and  obscuring  of  the  joints  of  the  ancient  pieces  has  robbed  this 
great  treasure  of  much  of  its  beauty.  We  are  mainly  interested 
in  the  attitude  of  the  figure,  several  interpretations  of  which  have 
been  presented,  e.g.  an  athlete  holding  a  ball  in  his  right  hand, 
or  Perseus  holding  out  the  Gorgon's  head  at  arm's  length.  All 
these  interpretations  may  be  wrong.  Perhaps  the  solution  is 
found  in  the  fact  that  we  are  dealing  with  a  Hellenistic  prod- 
uct which  shows  features  of  both  Praxiteles  and  Lysippos. 
Waldstein,1  who  at  first  regarded  it  as  Praxitelean,  subse- 
quently ascribed  it  to  Skopas.2  Together  with  this  statue 
there  were  certain  smaller  objects,  especially  two  bronzes  of 
small  size,  that  are  especially  precious  because  they  have  not 
been  tampered  with.  But  the  large  statue  is  the  pride  of  the 
National  Museum  at  Athens. 

The  Zeus  of  Otricoli,  which  was  once  admired  beyond  all  pro- 
priety, has  dropped  to  its  proper  place  as  Hellenistic  (p.  172). 
There  is,  however,  a  similarity  between  it  and  the  noble  head  of 
Asklepios  of  Melos  (p.  228),  but  the  difference  is  far  greater  than 
the  similarity.  The  Asklepios  comes  nearer  to  the  prototype,  and 
is  full  of  nobility,  while  the  Otricoli  bust  is  simply  big.  If  the  face 
were  distorted  by  pain,  it  would  resemble  Laocodn.  Furtwang- 
ler3  declared  that  the  bust  from  Otricoli  is  the  Praxitelean  devel- 
opment of  a  type  created  in  the  days  of  Myron.  But  the  reason 
for  this  belief  is  difficult  to  see. 

1  Monthly  Review,  June,  1 901,  no. 

2  Illustrated  London  News,  June  6,  1903. 

3  Masterpieces,   190.     Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.   130;    Von  Mach,  487. 


THE   HELLENISTIC    AGE  277 

A  group  of  colossal  statuary  called  "  Menelaos  and  Patroklos  Ml 
in  the  Loggia dei  Lanzi  at  Florence  lias  become  famous;  but  a 

good  deal  oi  what  we  now  behold  is  restoration,  the  head,  neck, 
upper  part  of  the  body,  and  both  arms.  Patroklos  has  lost  both 
arms  and  suffered  many  abrasions.  In  spite  of  all  this  we  have 
an  impressive  group.  The  representation  shows  Menelaos  res- 
cuing the  body  of  his  friend  and  carrying  him  to  the  ships. 
Sorely  pressed,  he  is  about  to  drop  his  dear  burden  on  the 
ground.  The  gentleness  with  which  he  lowers  it  is  as  touching 
as  anything  in  sculpture.  Menelaos  should,  however,  be  restored 
as  looking  up  and  back  at  the  foes  who  are  trying  to  surround 
him.  The  famous  "  Pasquino"  in  Rome  had  the  proper  attitude, 
and  was  an  excellent  statue,  before  it  was  battered  almost 
beyond  recognition.  There  is  perhaps  no  other  statue  of  the 
Hellenistic  age  that  shows  so  much  pure  pathos  in  spite  of  its 
neglect.  The  Hellenistic  Age  is  here  amply  acquitted  of  deca- 
dence and  jejuneness. 

We  may  here  mention  the  Nile,  represented  as  a  river  god  in 
human  form.-  His  head  partakes  of  the  types  of  Zeus  and 
Poseidon;  but  he  is  unmistakably  made  a  god  of  Egypt,  since 
he  leans  upon  a  sphinx,  and  has  a  crocodile  and  an  ichneumon 
at  his  feet.  We  have  already  seen  Antioch  personified.  We  are 
now  led  farther  into  allegory  by  sixteen  little  figures,  once  almost 
entirely  obliterated,  representing  the  sixteen  cubits  which  the 
river  reaches  in  its  maximum  inundation.  That  we  are  in  Egypl 
is  also  shown  by  the  waves  and  plant  life.  The  cornucopia 
too  speaks  of  the  abundant  fertility.  Here  allegory  readies  its 
utmost  bounds.  The  sculptor  has  endeavoured  to  tell  every- 
thing; but  by  overcrowding  has  confused  the  representation. 
It  is  well  that  the  reliefs  on  the  base  representing  the  daily 
life  of  the  Egyptian  people  are  relegated  to  the  back  and  two 

ends   of  the    base,  where    they    do     not   draw   attention   from   the 

main    theme.     The    sixteen    diminutive    figures    fill    up    many 
von!  and  enliven  the  representation  of  the  gigantii  rivei 

1  Hrunn-Bru'  km.mn,  N'>.  0  Mai.li,  J77.     '-'  I'.i  mm-  lWuckmann,  No.  196. 


THE    HELLENISTIC    AGE 


279 


Roman  show,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  terrible  cestuses  of  metal. 
In  those  two  interesting  but  horrible  figures  Greek  sculpture 
comes  to  an  end,  except  for  a  revival  of  the  antique,  harking 
back  even  to  the  archaic  style. 

The  colossal  head  called  the  Ludovisi  Hera  (Fig.  130)  was 
formerly  regarded  as  a  work  of  the  fourth  centuiv  B.C.,  or  even  as 
a  copy  of  the  famous  Hera 
of  Polykleitos  ;  but  it  is  now 
evident  that  it  is  a  Roman 
w.  irk,  probably  a  portrait  of 
some  lady  of  the  imperial 
family,  in  which  the  grand 
style  of  earlier  days  is 
imitated. 

In  Rome  the  so-called 
archaizing  style  became  the 
rage.  Its  first  representa- 
tive was  Pasiteles,  a  Greek 
born  in  southern  Italy.  He 
enjoyed  the  citizenship  of 
Rome,  and  was  a  friend 
of  the  famous  comedian 
Roscius,  who  flourished  in 
the  first  century  n.c.  He 
was  a  contemporary  of 
Pompey,  Cicero,  and  the 
poet  Archias.  Yarro  took 
pleasure  in  praising  an  artist 
who  was  a  Roman  citizen  by  adoption,  and  not  one  of  the  "  needy 
and    seedy"    <  In-.-ks,   who   came    to    Italy   to   acquire   a   beggarly 

subsistence.     Although  we  have  no  work  of  Pasiteles1  hand  we 

•  his  style,  and  at  least   have  an  idea  of  what  his  works  were 

like,   from   his   pupils,   of  whom   on.-   of   the   mosl    prominent    was 

Stephanos,  who  is  represented  by  a  statue  m  the  Villa  Albani.' 
I  Brunn-Brucknuuin,  n  j  Vun  MulIi,  pi, 


Fig.  131. 


So-c  tiled  (  »rrhl.-b  an.:  . 

(Naples.) 


28o  GREEK   SCULPTURE 

We  here  see  the  very  slender  proportions  of  an  athlete,  who 
might  be  a  gentleman,  a  figure  of  the  austere  style.  Toned 
down  and  softened,  the  statue  seems  to  give  an  equivocal  ex- 
pression. Through  this  antique  one  feels  a  false  note.  There 
is  sometimes  a  suggestion  of  Polykleitos  or  some  other  master; 
but  it  is  not  genuine.  It  is  perhaps  generally  now  admitted  that 
Stephanos  took  as  a  model  an  Argive  bronze  of  an  athletic 
victor  of  the  early  part  of  the  fifth  century,  perhaps  made  by 
some  pupil  of  Hagelaidas.  Several  groups  in  marble  show  this 
style,  which  we  may  call  late  Argive.  The  two  best  representa- 
tives are  the  so-called  Orestes  and  Electra  (Fig.  131)  in  the 
Naples  Museum,  and  the  Orestes  and  Pylades.1  These  names, 
however,  are  untrustworthy.  Another  group  of  mother  and  son, 2 
in  the  Museo  delle  Terme,  is  inscribed  as  the  work  of  Menelaos, 
who  was  a  pupil  of  Stephanos  and  lived  under  Augustus  or  Tibe- 
rius ;  but  the  line  is  weakening ;  the  trace  of  the  heroic  is  lost. 

1  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  307;   Von  Mach,  323. 

2  Brunn-Bruckmann,  No.  309;   Von  Mach,  322. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  281 

General  Works  qn  Gri  bk  So  lpti  i 

Collignon,  Histoire  de  la  sculpture  grecque,  Paris, 

Furtwaogler,  Meisterwerke  der  griechischen  Plastik,  Leipzig,  1 

Furtwangler,  Masterpieces  o(  Greek  Sculpture,  edited  bj   Eugenie 
Sellers.  London  and  New  York, 

nest  Gardner,  Handbook  of  Greek  Sculpture,  London  and  New 
York.  1896,  2d  ed.,  1906. 

Joubin,  l-i  sculpti  [ue  entre  le>  guerres  ra6diques  et  Pepoque 

de  1  V-ricli  s.  Paris,  1901. 

Kekule*  von  Stradonitz,  Die  griechische  Skulptur,  Berlin,  1907. 

Murray,  History  of  Greek  Sculpture,  2d  ed.,  London,  1890. 

Overbeck,    Geschichte   der  griechischen    Plastik,  4th   ed.,  Leipzig, 

1893-94- 

Perrot  and  Chipiez,  Histoire  de  Part  dans  Pantiquite*,  \* <  >1 .  VII,  La 
•  de  lYpopee;  la  Greet  archafque,  1<-  temple  (1898);  Vol.  VIII, 
La  <  In  ce  archaique,  la  sculpture  (1903).  I'.. 

ABBRl  \  1  \  I  IONS 

Arch.  Zeit.  =  Archaologische  Zeitung. 

Ath.  Mitt.  =  Afitleilungen  ties  kaiserlich  deutschen  archaologischen 

tuts,  .  tthenisi  he  Abteilung. 
B.C.//.      Bulletin  de  correspondance  hellenique. 

>>: .  A>  !  'itfnjUApis    \.pjfouo\oytKTJ. 

Jakrb.  =Jahrbuch  des  kaiserlich  deutschen  archaologischen  Inst  Huts. 
J. U.S.     Journal of Hel/enu  Studies. 
At  h.      Revue  <ir,  hlologique. 
m.  Mitt.      Mitteilungen  des  kaiserlich  deutschen  archaohgischen 
itutSf  Rdmische  Abteilung. 

Illustrai  1 

(  hiefly  to 
ann     Denknuu  ■   und  rbnuscher  Sculp- 

fur,  Muni<  h,  1 

inch.  /  rg     A'> :  de  la  statuaire grecque  et  romaine, 

14. 
t  Handbook  k  and  Roman  Sculpture  to  accom 

(ion  oj  '  Greek  and  Roman  Sculpture,  Bos* 

'9°5- 


INDEX 


Achilles,  shield  of,  30. 

Aegina,  temple  of  Aphaia,  113;  gable  groups, 
24,  41,  58,  90.  91,  104-116;  treasure  in 
British  Museum,  37. 

Aeginetan  art,  contrasted  with  Attic,  92; 
bronze,  used  by  Kanachos,  103;  by  Poly- 
kleitos,  20;  school,  104-117;  Apollo  from 
Ptoion,  104, 116;  bronze  head,  on  Akropolis, 
114-115;  bronze  head,  from  Herculaneum, 
115-116;  of  Zeus,  from  Olympia,  116-117. 

'AyaA/ia,  28. 

Agamemnon,  Talthybios,  Epeios,  relief  from 
Samothrake,  50,  73. 

Agasias,  Borghese  warrior,  231,  267-268. 

Agemo  or  Ageso,  from   Frankvrysi  (Asea), 

44- 
Agesander,  Laocoon  group,  262,  264. 
Agias,  at  Delphi,  230-231;  at  Pharsalos,  by 

Lysippos,  230-231. 
Aigospotamoi  trophy  at  Amyklai,  153. 
Akarnania,  statues  of  Naxian  marble  in,  23, 

77- 

Akragas,  Atlantes,  198. 

Akropolis  at  Athens,  Aeginetan  bronze  head, 
114-115;  Argive  bronze  head,  101-102,  144, 
154,  Athena  Promachos,  bronze  figurines 
of,  85-86,  Athena  seated,  45,  84-85;  bull 
and  lions  group,  58,  201 ;  chariot-race  relief, 
85-87;  epheboi,  82-83.  l2°'<  ephebos  head, 
yellow-haired,  79,  82-83,  116;  equestrian 
groups,  83-84 ;  female  statues,  77-82;  head- 
less draped  male,  86;  Hermes  relief,  86-87  '• 
Hydra  gable  group,  26,  56;  "  Maidens,"  44, 
52»  71,  73,  77-82.  84-86,  88,  90,  91,  94,  96, 
110,214;  Nikes,  75-76;  painting  on  archaic 
limestone  statues,  26;  pre-Persian  sculp- 
tures, 56-60;   replicas  of  Samian  Hera,  76- 

77- 

Akroteria,  temple  of  Asklepios  at  Epidauros, 
237;  temple  of  Zeus  at  Olympia,  133. 

Aktion,  archaic  statues  of  Apollo,  40 

Alexander,  coins,  233;  heads,  231-233;  herm, 
232;  sarcophagus,  27,  242-246;  statue  in 
Munich,  233. 

Alkamenes,  Aphrodite  in  the  Gardens,  208; 
pupil  of  Pheidias,2o8;  statues,  at  Pergamon, 
133;  statues  for  Thrasybulos,  133;  west 
gable  of  temple  of  Zeus  at  Olympia,  132-134. 

Alkinoos,  palace  of,  30. 

Altar  of  Athena  on  Akropolis,  frieze  for,  86; 
at  Pergamon,  friezes,  90,  254,  256-261. 

Alxenor,  stele  from  Orchomenos,  94-95. 

Amazon,  dead,  from  Attalid  groups,  255;  in 
Artemision  at   Ephesos,  by  Kresilas,  158- 


160;  by  Pheidias,  158-160,  164;  by  Phrad- 
mon,  158-160;  by  Polykleitos,  158-160. 

Amphalkes,  dedicator  of  Kitylos  and  Dermys 
relief,  55. 

Amphion,  Delphic  charioteer,  122  fn.;  lost 
gable  sculptures  of  Theseion  at  Athens,  196 
fn.  4. 

Amyklai,  throne  of  Apollo,  47-48;  Aigospo- 
tamoi trophy,  153. 

Anakreon  playing  his  harp,  270. 

Anathemata,  28. 

Andros,  Hermes  of,  273. 

Angelion,  pupil  of  Dipoinos  and  Skyllis,  46, 
113;   teacher  of  Kallon,  113. 

Anhydrite,  34. 

Antenor,  "  Maiden,"  79,  118-119;  Tyranni- 
cides, 29,  79,  117-119. 

Antikythera,  bronze  statue,  22,  275-276. 

Antioch,  school,  247;  see  Fortune  of  Antioch. 

Aphaia,  temple  on  Aegina  of,  113;  gable 
groups,  24,  41,  58,  90,  91,  104-116. 

Aphrodite,  armed,  from  Epidauros,  248-249; 
of  Capua,  252;  in  Copenhagen,  252;  crouch- 
ing, from  Vienne,  273;  in  the  Gardens,  by 
Alkamenes,  208;  head  (?)  from  Kythera, 
104-105;  head  (Skopasiau)  in  National 
Museum,  Athens,  215;  of  Knidos  by  Praxi- 
teles, 17,  221-222,  252;  of  Kos  by  Praxiteles, 
221-222;  of  Melos,  247,  251-253,  269,  271; 
Ourania  in  Berlin  Museum,  180;  Sosandra 
by  Alkamenes,  145. 

Apollo,  statues  from  Aktion,  40;  of  Amyklai, 
47;  Belvedere,  247,  268-270;  Choiseul 
Gouffier,  145;  statues  at  Delos,  50;  at 
Delphi,  97;  Epikourios  at  Bassai,  frieze  of 
temple  of,  175, 198-202;  metopes,  199;  from 
Keratia,  60;  fay  Leochares,  269:  of  Melos, 
40;  by  Myron,  151;  Naxian  statuettes,  103- 
104;  of  the  Omphalos,  145-146;  of  Orcho- 
menos, 40,  54-55;  Payne  Knight,  103;  at 
Pergamon  by  Onatas,  113,  116;  Philesios 
at  Branchidae  by  Kanachos,  17,  103-104; 
Piombino,  104;  statues  from  the  Ptoion,  40, 
41,  104,  116;  Sciarra,  103;  Strangford,  116; 
of  Tenea,  40,  60,  68,  113;  of  Thera,  39,  46, 
52,  113;  type,  39741,  59,  92;  on  column- 
drum  of  old  Artemision  at  Ephesos,  48,  53; 
unfinished,  at  Ikaria,  25. 

Apollonia,  archaic  relief  of  man  and  dog  from, 
96. 

Apollonios,  copy  of  Doryphoros,  156-157; 
Farnese  bull  group,  265-267. 

Apoxyomenos  by  Lysippos,  229;  in  Vatican, 
229-231. 


1  The  author  and  editor  are  indebted  for  this  Index  to  Dr.  Kendall  K.  Smith,  of  Harvard 

University. 

282 


INDEX 


283 


Archaic  smile,  40,   - 

18,38-117,27^;    enron 

38:  tjfpe 
Archai  380. 

Archermos,  ription  on  Akj 

NDcc  .  95. 

-   lilpturc,  28. 

. 

.  144,  154 : 
relit 

144  .  late,  280. 

i  =;4.  228-229. 
5,  relief  nf  1  toryphoi  •   ulp- 

ture  from   temple  ar- 

chaic seated  h^ure  from  road  between  Trip- 

M- 

A r i - 1 1  ■ :  1  -tele,  2S,  91 

Am-i  sec 

v.  28,  91-ij 

Vristokles,  103. 
tonument,  211. 

Artemis,  statue  to,  41  - 

44.   .  of,  from  1 

if  kritios,  -  •   Hera  1  *i 
of  V  Amazon  in  Villa 

Doria  P  imfili  I  il*  -\  ■■  .  <  59. 

Artemisia,  216. 

mi  in,  158-160, 
164  nmn-drum*  from  old,  53- 

54.1  .218. 

Asklepicion   .<: 

v    Myr.in, 
m  Peiraeus,  *is  116;    relied  from 

,  237-238. 

Imet  of    \thena 
Parti 
Assos,  sculptures  from  temple  ,  58. 

rid  puteal,  177-178: 
I  temple    on     Akropolis,     . 

. 
fne/e  for,  H7;     pre  ■  IVi-i-.tr.i-  ■  e   On 

Ak-  .Me  grouj 

88 . 

1  .  84 ; 

I  1'  1. 

liv 

lis. 

at   Pellcne   by    I'h 

I 

,     the 

Atri' 
lit. 

V 

Athr  « 


93,  1)4;    chorapic  monument  of  I.ysikratcs 

.it.  I  l-'.rci htheioD  u  ulptures, 

■patiwn  head  of  |oddesf  1  r .  ■  1 1 1 

epieion,  sis;  Dumber  of  atatuea  in,  16; 

Theaeioi  ..-«>;  gable  groups, 

metope*.  194   195. 

Athlete   "I    LotlVre,   I  .'.;,.    fwHllUlll. 

I2o    1  --I 
Allan:  198. 

Attalo*  1.  ips  presented  to  Athens 

5 
Attic  .irt,  in  Asia  Minor,  11  1 :  contrasted  with 
Veginetan,    ,-•;    in   Delphi,   1*3;    in    Pi 

-   soa ;    influent  e,  161;    origin 

reliefs,  inllii- 
cm  ■  1  '•  1  :   -id-  ulp- 

tUU  , 

Balustrade  ,,f  temple  of  Athena  Nike,  192- 

ini  Faun,  27 1;   Juno,  207 
Bassai,  temple  of  Apollo  Epikourioa  at,  166; 

fric/e,  17s,  198-202;  metopes,  >  .. 
Bathykles,  throne  of  Apt  Uo  at  Amyklai,  47- 

48. 

\  aphio,  •  up-  from,  32-33. 
\      llo,  247,  208-270;    torso,  270- 

Beneventum,  bronae  head  from,  161 

Berlin   Museum,   Amazon,    150   160;   draped 

re,  180;   hi  I  143. 

.n  1  lelphi, 
Bluebeard  croup  from  pre-Peisistratean  tem- 
ple..',  tthena  on   Vkropolis,  96,  57— 59. 
from,   -i 
! j.tu re    in,  N  Lzian 

marble  from,  77,  .,1 

i,  208;  warrior, 
231,  207-268. 

1  Museum  of  Pine   trts,  bead  of  /eus, 

172;    reliel   similar   to    I, ml. mm   relief,    140 

141;    vase-painting  of    tyrannicides,   118- 

I20. 

R<<ii,/fuse,    la  f'ftite,  78    - 

elleTi        .    ■  ronie 

1  1  ilympia,  278. 

n,  Poly  klei  tan,  tl  1 ;  praying, 
in  Berlin, 

I  -,  heforc  palai  1    of 
UkinoOi . 

I  from  M\ 
Brani  hidac,  Apollo  Philesi  a  at. 

17,1  i     ircl  figures  on 

to,    1 

1 1.  bronze  st.iiu.  in, 
Bronzi  ol 

ilpton  using,  -■•■  use  foi  itatues  in  "pen 
.01 ,  \  '  orinthian,  20; 

Deli 

.  :n,  .0  I  lalikarnassos,  --17. 

Bull,    plaster     lie  i,|     fo  iTfl      Kn  liver 

,1  Myi  enae,         1  1 

■  11. 1  lion*  group  on 

Bull-baiting     group,    ivory     statuette*     from 

Ki. 
Bupalos,  * 1  \i-  bi  rmos,    1 


284 


INDEX 


Caesars,  statues  of,  29. 

Calf-bearer,  24,  59-60,  83. 

Candlesticks  of  gold,  in  Homeric  poems,  30. 

"  Canon  "  of  Polyldeitos.     See  Doryphoros. 

Capitoline,    Amazon,     159-160;      Aphrodite, 

Knidiau,   222;     Satyr    of    Praxiteles,   220; 

Skopasian  head,  215;  Spinario,  144. 
Capua,  Aphrodite  of,  252. 
Carrey,  drawings  supposed  to  be  by,  175-176. 
Catajo,  head  from,  152. 
Centocelli  Eros,  219. 
Chalkis,  lack  of  bronze  in,  20,  21. 
Chares,  Colossos  of  Rhodes,  262. 
Chares,  seated  figure  from  Branchidae,  45,  46, 

5°>.6°- 

Chariot,  relief  in  Candia  Museum,  34;  bronze, 
from  Etruria,  in  New  York  Metropolitan 
Museum,  66-70;  of  Gelon  by  Glaukias, 
114;   group  for  Hiero  by  Onatas,  113. 

Charioteer  at  Delphi,  22,  121-123;  frieze  of 
Mausoleum,  122,  218. 

Chariot-race  relief  from  Akropolis,  85-87. 

Cheramyes,  dedicated  Hera  of  Samos,  76. 

Cherbuliez'  Le  Cheval  de  Phidias,  187. 

Chest  of  Kypselos,  19,  20,  46-48. 

Chios,  family  of  Archermos  from,  5o-5r; 
sculptors  of,  using  Parian  marble,  23-24; 
school  of,  50-53,  77. 

Choiseul  Gouffier  Apollo,  145. 

Choragic  monument   of  Lysikrates,  238-239. 

Christians,  mutilation  of  statues  by,  55,  258. 

Chronological  divisions  of  Greek  sculpture, 
28;  of  archaic  sculpture,  38. 

Chronology  of  Cretan  and  Mycenaean  art, 
36-37- 

Chrysapha,  relief  from,  29,  60. 

Chryselephantine  statuary,  beginning  of,  20  ; 
early  examples,  36,  47  ;  by  Pheidias,  27, 
154,  164—172  ;  by  Polykleitos,  154,  160. 

Chrysothemis,  of  Argive  school,  46. 

Cicero,  criticism  of  Kalamis  and  Kanachos, 
146. 

Cipollino,  24. 

Cire  perdue,  method  of  casting  bronze, 
21—22. 

Cockerell,  106,  199. 

Coins,  value  of,  for  history  of  Greek  sculp- 
ture, 17  ;  of  Alexander,  233  ;  of  Sparta, 
showing  Apollo  of  Amyklai,  47  ;  of  Gordia- 
nusIII,  showing  Apollo  of  Branchidae,  103; 
of  Miletos,  showing  Apollo  of  Branchidae, 
17,  103  ;  of  Athens,  showing  Athena  con- 
tending with  Poseidon,  182  ;  of  Argos  and 
Elis,  showing  Hera  of  Polykleitos,  160  ; 
of  Sikyon,  showing  Herakles  of  Skopas, 
215  ;  of  Athens,  showing  Marsyas,  150  ; 
showing  Nike  of  Samothnke,  250  ;  Tyran- 
nicide group,  118  ;  of  Elis,  with  head  of 
Zeus,  t7. 

Colossos  of  Rhodes  by  Chares,  262. 

Colour  applied  to  sculpture,  see  Painting. 

Copenhagen,  Diadumenos,  158  ;  draped  torso 
(Aphrodite),  2^2;  female  statues  in,  117, 
207  ;  fleeing  woman,  207  ;  head  of  athlete, 
82  ;  high-crowned  (Myronian)  head,  153  ; 
relief  of  Orestes  slaying  Aegisthos,  102-103. 

Copies,  17. 

Copper,  from  Cyprus,  si. 


Corcyra,  62. 

Corinth,  art  of,  62  ;  gilded  wooden  statues  at 

19  ;  inscribed    bases  of  Lysippos   at,    16  ; 

material  of  sculptures  in  later  city,  24. 
Corinthian  bronze,  20  ;   reliefs,  20,  47  ;  vases 

and  chest  of  Kypselos,  47. 
Cretan    art,     relation     to    Mycenaean,     34  ; 

oiigin  of  later  Selinus  metopes,  65. 
Crimea,   gold    medallions   showing     head   of 

Athena  Parthenos,  from,  165. 
Cultus  statues,  28. 
Cupbearer,  arm  of,  in  relief,  from    Knossos, 

36- 
Cups,  gold,  from  Mycenae,  30  ;  from  Vaphio, 

32-33- 
Cyprus,  copper  mines,  21. 

Daggers,  bronze  inlaid,  from  Mycenae,  33-34. 
Daidalos,   teacher  of  Dipoinos  and    Skyllis, 

3°,  46. 

Damasistrate,  grave  relief,  210. 

Damophon,  group  from  Lykosura,  28,  274- 
275  :  repairs  Olympian  Zeus  of  Pheidias, 
171— 172. 

Dancers,  from  Herculaneum,  141. 

Delian  bronze,  20,  156. 

Delos,  colossal  Naxian  "Apollo  "  statues  at, 
50  ;  Diadumenos  from,  158  ;  Dionysos, 
wooden,  at,  19,  20  ;  "Maidens"  of,  44,  71, 
73,  80  ;  Nikandre  from,  41-44,  46,  52,  77  ; 
replicas  of,  43  ;  Nike  of  Archermos,  51-53, 
63>  75i  95  :.  warrior,  256. 

Delphi,  Agias,  230-^231  ;  archaic  Apollo 
figures,  97  ;  Athenian  treasury,  metopes, 
in  ;  Charioteer,  22,  121-123  ;  Knidian 
treasury,     frieze,    98-99,     in  ;    Maidens, 

96,  99,  197;  Miltiades  and  eponymi  by 
Pheidias,  169  ;  number  of  statues  for- 
merly at,  16  ;   Sikyonian  treasury,  metopes, 

97,  99  ;  Tarentine  group  by  Onatas,  113  ; 
Thessalian  group,  230-231. 

Demeter,  black,  by  Onatas,  at  Phigaleia,  113  ; 
Despoina,  Artemis  and  Anytos,  group  by 
Damophon  at  Lykosura,  28,  274-275  ;  of 
Knidos,  227-228  ;   see  Hera. 

Demetria  and  Pamphile,  grave  relief,  210. 

Demetrios  of  Phaleron,  statue  of,  29. 

Dermys  and  Kitylos  relief,  55. 

Despoina,  temple  at  Lykosura  of,  group 
from,  28,  274-275. 

Dexileos  monument,  209,  237. 

Diadems,  gold,  from  Mycenae,  30. 

Diadochoi,  statues  of,  29. 

Diadumenos  by  Polykleitos,  23,  157-158,  161. 

Dion  Chrysostom,  18. 

Dionysos,  wooden,  at  Delos,  19-20. 

Dipoinos,  pupil  of  Daidalos,  46,  113  ;  statues 
in  Peloponnesos,  46  ;  in  Sikyon,  46,  103, 
153  ;  teacher    of  Tektaios   and  Angelion, 

.IJ3- 
Dipylon,   discus-thrower  stele,  93-94;    grave 

reliefs,  73,  209-211,  214,  237;  seated  figure, 

archaic,  45. 
Diskobolos,  Massimi,2s;  by  Myron,  148-150, 

152,  155 ;   stele  from  Dipylon,  93-94. 
Does,    gold    and     silver,    before     palace     of 

Alkinoos,  30. 
Doliana  marble,  24,  44,  199,  212. 


INI'1  X 


»«5 


Pontas,  of  Spartan  school,  < 

i  influence  at  Athens,  78. 

bool,  46. 

.  229. 
1  'rcsiicn  I*  ■>  .  161. 

Athenian  Maiden*,  S- 
Duplication   of  Apollo   type,   55;    of  bronze 
:ues,  23. 
-,  vase  of,  120. 
,  Gaul,  lis,  247,  255-256. 

Egypt,  age  of  bronze-casting  in,  21 ;   sculpture 

347. 
Egyptian  influence,  39. 
Eirene  .mJ  Plui  .  339-340. 

Kleusis.  Eubuk  tiles  relief, 

236;    Ml  Marathonoiri 

lief,  94:    ram's  head,  a:  -t.iuiclle, 

archaic,  43:    Triptolen.. 

relief,  303-305. 
Elcutherna,  archaic  seated  figure,  44 

.  191,  198. 
1  10s,  pupilof  I>aidalos,  46;    seated  Athena 

Ephcboi  on  Akropolis,  83-83.  lao. 

Ephebos   head,  yellow-haired,  on  Akropolis, 

79,  82-83,  11. 
Eph-  trtemifion,  reliefs  on  column- 

drums,  53:  later  Artemision,  Amazona  in, 

158-160,  164;  reliefs  on  column-drums,  ai8. 
uiros,    armed    \  \ 

klepios  reliefs,  237-  23S:  temple  of  I 

sculptures   by     I 

Timotheos,  217,    337-230;    Nike   of  Mum- 

mius,  251. 
Equestrian    groups,   archaic,    on     ' 

83-84;   by  Lykios,  before  Pi  147. 

Erechtheion    at    Athens,     architecture,     1,7; 

frieze,  197:   Maidens,  1  ,7-198,  205,  240. 
1       -  by  Praxiteles,  319-321,  . 

lyan,  bronze    hc.il  in   British   Museum 

from,  253. 
1  Metropolitan 

-cum    from,    66-70;     tripods   from,   66, 

69-70. 
Etruscan  art,  66,  68,  70. 
Euboca,  green  marble  from,  24 
I       ileus  bead  from  I-  leusis,  226-237. 
123. 

I  ,ter.  228. 

! 

'•  373,  377. 

Farnese,  bull  group.  247.  1  '1  idume- 

■  1 . 
1  1   irberini,  273;    Marble,  II  1 

•ury  sculpture,  117    311 

I  .    I        .    nt 

I  s-  woman  i 

■    from 

m 

■ 

monuroc 


kiates,  238-330.;  Erechtheion,  197;  Mauso- 
leum u  Halikarnasi  •  218, 
237;  Nereid  monument  -it  Xanthos,  an; 
Parthenon,  45,  87,  99,  .  184-190, 
195  temple  .11  \ 
58;  tcin 

1  -istr.iu  i   tempi 
V  .11  Akropolis,  87 

Nike,    190-192,    195,    196,    200;      1 
.    -*oo. 
Front.ilitv,  Law  of,  120. 

I  lest  on  Akropolis,  36,  5'  , 
Parthenon,  4>,   i6a,  17''   iS ; .  193,  250, 
273;     Peisistratid    temple    of    Athena    on 

•11,    164; 
pre-Peisistratean    temple     of    Athena    on 
Akropolis,    t6,    49,    57-60,    65;     tempi- 
Apl  '  >,  24,  41,  5S,  90,  ,1 ,  11 .4 

:  temple  of  Athena  Alea  .11    regea,  16, 

24.    Ill    215,    2.'4,    231:     temple   .■ 

rmpia,  24,  102,   tax,  126-13;,  141,  154. 
206,  207;   Tl.  1  .<    197;    treasury  of 

1  iani  .u  < '  1  y  1 1 1 1  ■  1 . 1 ,  >  1 ,  >  5,  260. 
,27. 

\n.ili.l  groups,  354-355; 
ipitoline,    11.'.    247,   255-256; 
Staying    himself  with   wife,    256;   wounded, 
in  I  ouvre,  256. 
Gems,  value  for  history  of  Greek  sculpture, 
17;  showing  Amazon  leaning  on  pillar. 
of   Aspasias,    showing    helmet   of   Ai 
Parthenos,  165;  showing  Lemnian  Athena, 
"1.  34.  35- 
Genxano,  Skopauan  head  from,  215. 
Gesso  dure,  36. 

runner,  of  Vatican,  145. 
( ritiadas,  ol  Spartan  schoi  1 
Giustiniani    Athena,    208-209;     Hcstia,    137, 

207. 
Glaukiaa,  Chariot  for  Gelon,  114;    Delphi) 

■  harioteer  ft),  122. 
Glaul  S°> 

( ilykon,  I  irm   1   Herakli    .      ■,,  271. 

^s  removing  sandals,  Hellenistic  bronze, 
374- 

Goethe,  181,  210. 

Gold,  Itatuea  in  Homeric  poems,  30;  ol  i 
found     at    M 

lio,   32     33;    Sf,    '  ll.lllllllC. 

.    ,1 :  from  1  •■ 
lui,  73,   209  an,  214,   B37J    from    llissos, 
ill]  from  Sparta, 

I    ■ 
"  <  rrinning  type  "  in  ai  pture,  4 

,  i\.  11  by  Pliny,  1 

...    1  ■  inw 

I  Myron, 

■ 

Halil  ■     • 

:  1 


286 


INDEX 


Harvest  Home  vase  from  Holy  Trinity,  36. 

Hawthorne's  Marble  Faun,  220. 

Head  (Aeginetan),  bronze,  from  Akropolis, 
114-115;  (Argive)  bronze  from  Akropolis, 
101-102,  144,  154;  Skopasian,  of  goddess, 
from  Asklepieion  at  Athens,  215;  bronze, 
from  Beneventum,  161;  Bologna,  163; 
Catajo,  152;  of  athlete  in  Copenhagen,  82; 
high-crowned  (Myronian)  in  Copenhagen, 
153;  from  Erzindyan,  in  British  Museum, 
253;  from  Genzano,  215;  (Aeginetan) 
bronze,  from  Herculaneum,  115-116;  Ince- 
Blundell,  152-153;  archaic  bronze  from 
Kythera,  61,  104-105;  Laborde,  183;  from 
Meligou,  61;  from  Miletos,  archaic  male, 
in  British  Museum,  49;  in  Constantinople, 
49;  colossal,  of  goddess,  in  Museo  delle 
Terme,  141;  female,  from  Pergamon,  253; 
Rampin,  82-83;  Vincent,  161. 

Heads,  archaic,  poros,  in  Akropolis  Museum, 
58,  59;  archaic,  from  Ptoion,  43,  55;  Sko- 
pasian, 215. 

Hegeso,  grave  relief  in  Dipylon,  73,  209. 

Hegias,  145  :  criticism  of,  by  Lucian,  120; 
teacher  of  Myron,  148;  of  Pheidias,  147, 169. 

Heifer,  bronze,  by  Myron,  151. 

Helios  and  chariot  by  Lysippos,  at  Rhodes, 
236. 

Hellenistic  Sculpture,  247-280. 

Hera  of  Argos  by  Polykleitos,  153,  154,  156, 
160,  279;  marble  head,  from  Argos,  161; 
Farnese,  162;  Ludovisi,  279;  head  at 
Olympia,  61;  from  Samos,  54,  76;  replicas 
on  Akropolis,  76-77;  "  Barberini  Juno," 
207-208;  or  Demeter,  207. 

Herakles,  Belvedere  torso  of,  270-271;  Far- 
nese, by  Glykon,  234,  271;  by  Lysippos  at 
Sikyon,  234;  by  Lysippos  at  Tarentum, 
236;  by  Myron,  151;  by  Onatas  at  Olympia, 
113;  by  Skopas,  in  Gymnasium  at  Sikyon, 
215;  and  Triton  gable,  oldest,  on  Akropolis, 

57.  65- 
Herculaneum,   dancers,    137,    141;    bust    by 

Apollonios  of  Doryphoros  by  Polykleitos, 

156-157;       head      (Aeginetan),      115-116; 

"  wrestlers  "  in  Naples,  150,  235. 

Hermes,  of  Andros,  273;  by  Praxiteles,  16, 
124,  213,  2r4,  219,  222-224,  239_24o;  rest- 
ing, in  Naples  Museum,  234-235;  relief 
from  Akropolis,  86-87;  Apollo,  Nymphs 
and  Graces,  relief  from  Thasos,  72-73. 

Heroon  at  Trysa,  reliefs,  211. 

Hertz  head  of  Nike  by  Paionios,  207. 

Hestia  Giustiniani,  in  the  Torlonia  Museum, 
137,  207. 

Holy  Trinity  (Crete),  Harvest  Home  vase,  36. 

Homeric  poems,  31. 

Honorary  statues,  29. 

Horror  vacui,  66. 

Horses,  archaic,  on  Akropolis,  83-84. 

Hydra  gable  group  on  Akropolis,  26,  56. 

Hymettos  marble,  24,  59. 

Idolino,  152,  161. 

Ikaria,  stele  of  warrior,  92;   unfinished  archaic 

Apollo,  25. 
Iktinos,  architect  of  Parthenon,  173;  of  temple 

at  Bassai,  199. 


Ilioneus,  274. 

Ilissos,  grave  relief,  210-211. 

Ince-Blundell  head,  152,  153. 

Inscription  of  Agasias  of  Ephesos,  268;  Age- 
sander,  Athenodoros,  Polydoros,  264;  Alex- 
ander, 232;  Alkamenes,  on  statue  at 
Pergamon,  133;  Alxenor,  94;  Antenor,  79; 
Apollo  from  Ptoion,  41 ;  Archermos,  51,  76; 
Dermys  and  Kitylos,  55;  Eubuleus  in 
Vatican,  226;  on  Lakratides  relief,  226; 
fisherman  dedicating  maiden  to  Poseidon, 
81;  Glykon  on  Farnese  Herakles,  234; 
Kallon,  113;  Kombos,  on  base  of  Calf- 
bearer,  59;  Lysikrates,  choragic  monument 
of,  239;  Lysippos  on  Agias  base  from 
Pharsalos,  230;  ontwobasesat  Corinth,  16; 
on  replica  of  Farnese  Herakles,  234;  iater 
Myron,  148;  Nikandre  on  archaic  female 
statue,  42;  Onatas,  113;  Paionios,  on  base 
of  Nike,  133,  207;  Praxiteles  on  base  of 
Colossos  of  Monte  Cavallo,  225 ;  Theodoros 
on  the  Akropolis,  77;  Thrasymedes  and 
Timotheos  at  Epidauros,  237;  Zeus  Eubu- 
leus at  Paros,  226;  on  plinth  of  Aphrodite 
of  Melos,  253;  relating  to  temple  of  Athena 
Nike,  192;  on  base  of  colossus  at  Delos,  50; 
of  Delphic  charioteer,  121-122;  on  bronze 
statue  from  Kreusis,  117;  Nike  of  Mummius 
at  Epidauros,  251 ;  fragment  of  archaic 
female  figure  from  Ptoion,  43;  relief  from 
Thasos,  73 ;  Thessalian  group  at  Delphi, 
230;   temple  of  Zeus  at  Olympia,  124. 

Ionic  art,  49,  50,  53,  58;  in  Aegina,  112;  in 
Athens,  74  ff.  83,  118,  119;  in  Boeotia,  95- 
96;  in  Etruria,  66;  in  Lycia,  71-72;  in 
Thasos,  73;  revolt  against  in  Athens,  78; 
artists  in  Athens,  75-77;  frieze  on  Pei- 
sistratid  temple  of  Athena,  87. 

Island  gems,  34-35;  marble,  23. 

Isokephaly,  49,  186. 

Ivory  statuette  from  bull-baiting  group  at 
Knossos,  35-36. 

Jason,  the  sandal-binder,  187. 

Juno,  Barberini,  207-208  ;   Borghese,  208. 

Kairos,  by  Lysippos  at  Sikyon,  237  ;  by 
Polykleitos,  236-237. 

Kalamis,  121  ;  Ludovisi  throne,  141  ;  works, 
145-146  ;  Aphrodite  (Sosandra),  145. 

Kallikrates,  architect  of  Parthenon,  173. 

Kallimachos,  24. 

Kallon,  ir3-n4. 

Kanachos,  compared  with  Kalamis  by  Cicero, 
146;  Apollo  Philesios  of  Branchidae,  17, 
103-104  ;  Ismenian  Apollo  at  Thebes, 
104. 

Karyatid,  197. 

Kaufmann,  head  of  Athena  Parthenos,  165  ; 
of'Knidian  Aphrodite,  222. 

Kephisodotos,  Eireneand  Plutos,  239-240. 

Keratia,  Apollo  from,  60. 

Kertch  vase,  Athena  contending  with  Posei- 
don, 182. 

Kitylos,  see  Dermys. 

Klearchos,  pupil  of  Daidalos,  46  ;  Zeus  at 
Sparta,  21. 

Kleobis  of  Argos,  statue  at  Delphi,  qj. 


1X1  »1  \ 


Knidian    fricre  at  Delphi,  98-111  ;    Maiden*, 

198. 
KlUOOt,   Aphrodite 

Knosaos,  bull  ry,  35-36  ; 

:cr  bull's  I 
(Combos,  -cr  I    1 

k  •  - ,     1  •,    I  1  ,  v  1  ■  • 

Kresilas,   \  160. 

KrniM-,  -eidon 

Gram, 
ICritios   and    \  riticized  by  Ludan, 

isn  ■  ;    Parthenon 

metopes.  17;;  Tyrannicides,  118  uj. 
.  36. 
Kyni  161. 

Kypselos,  I  :■    1 
K.ythcr.1,  head   1  Aphrodite  ?) 

from,  61,  104-105. 

Laborde  head,  183. 

I 

Lakratidi  ;^6. 

Lain'1  •  Iron),  50. 

Lancelotti  Disl  ,  148-150. 

!o\*  nc  I  'i-  ■ 
Lao-  -'74,  376. 

Ituette  from  beehive   tomb  on   Ml. 

I 

Lemnian  Athena  by  Pheidias,  163-164, 
169. 

Leaormant  statuette.  i<  4-166. 

loleum  at 
Halikarnassos,  217. 

us,  group   by   Praxiteles 

I 
Iyeul  ■  -,  on  frieze  at  Itelphi, 

i  ictte,  1 00-101,  1  54. 

'  .       tae,  30,  34; 
s  in  srulpturc 

l mi,    18  ; 
I.ucian,   18,  !-•>,    1:7,  11. is,    18, 

•     •  "77. 

107.  I'liny  the    I 

20,  ! 

1  1         \ 
27.  17. 

Louvre,    aihk  .  mall 

1  t   ,  .f 

head     of     f)i  1 

. 

,  144 

I 

•:  throne   in 

141. 
Lychnitti ,  marble  1 

from,  71    7.'  : 

147 

•■III      of,       II. 

238 


Lysippean  bead  on  rVrismgeiton   in    Naples 

M  useum, 
Lysii  influence, 

materia  . 

number  I'liny's    bias,    18; 

I  iks,    228- 

tgias,  \     .  indei    iiatues, 

I    u\  re  aih- 
leti  .  1 

and  1  hariot,  ai   K:.  I U-r- 

:\V-  ,1    I  arentum. 

Hei  Kairos  .11  Silcyon, 

237 ;   Mi  leager  in  I  I   iteran    Po- 

the  wrestler,  Naples  Museum, 
»35- 

liadumeno  ,  177-180. 

Maen  1  in  Berlin, 

1  ,. 
Maidi  Aki         1     it  Athi  ns,  44,  53,  71, 

i,  84-86,8.-. 

I >e  I     .  11  sis, 

ur\ 

Siphnians  and    rCnidiani  ai 

Manti  p    if  I  'to,  Apollo,  and  Arte- 

mis, l.y  Praxiteles,  18, 
225,  .4^ 

Marathon,  Vristion  stile. 

■  i  in  I.I111-1 

Marble,    sculptors   working    in,  u-c    in 

Ijiiurc    23,  24. 

-'O. 

Marri  and   Vmphitrite,  relief , 

275 
Marsy  is  by  Myron,  148,  150-151. 

"-">  3°- 
M  is.imi  I  liskobolos,  25. 
. 
i  .Is  used  in  ( In  ■  k  s.  ulpture,  ny-24. 
M.iitri  Ain.i/011. 

Mausoleum    ai    Halikarnassos,    Dieses,  122, 
214,  216-218,  237. 
.17. 
lions,  gold,  from  the  Crimea,  ibowing 
■ 
Venui 
il  Apollo  from,  051   s.  ulpiors 

from 

11  rv     .il     <  llympia     of,     ^ablc 

s.  ulptun 

•  5<- 

.11  Rome, 
M.  ii.  111   marble  head  from. 

ilo      of,      4   ..       Asklc  J 

P    eido     of,  a       171, 873. 
Menekrates,  lion  from  tomb  of, 
\1ri  .  ip  -ii  mothei  ami  sou  by,  j8o. 

in  I  .  277. 

Parti  174 

■     ,1    \        .    1  , .    temple  "i  .\|„,. 
.11  Selinu 

nplc  /    si 

temple    /     11 

•  rnplc  oi  Zeus  al  1  >lym- 


288 


INDEX 


pia,  123,  135-137,  141.  i94i  z34;  Theseion 
at  Athens,  194-195;  treasury  of  Athe- 
nians at  Delphi,  in;  treasury  ofSikyonians 
at  Delphi,  97-99. 

Michelangelo,  25,  152,  227. 

Mikkiades,   father    of   Archermos   of   Chios, 

51- 

Miletos,  archaic  male  head  in  British  Museum 
from,  49;  archaic  male  head  in  museum  at 
Constantinople  from,  49;  archaic  seated 
figures  from,  45,  49;  later  archaic  sculp- 
ture at,  74. 

Miltiades  and  eponymous  heroes,  group  by 
Pheidias  at  Delphi,  169. 

Mnesikles,  192. 

Models,  25. 

Monte  Cavallo,  Colossi,  225. 

Montorsoli,  restorations  of  Apollo  Belvedere 
by,  270. 

Morosini,  177,  183. 

Moschophoros,  see  Calf-bearer. 

Mother  and  son,  group  by  Menelaos,  in 
Museo  delle  Terme,  280. 

Mt.  Tainaron,  red  marble  from,  24. 

Mt   Taygetos,  leaden  statuette  from,  53. 

Mourning  Athena,  relief  on  Akropolis,  167, 
203-206. 

Murder  scene,  relief  at  Sparta,  61. 

Mycenae,  bracelets,  30;  bull's  head,  36;  cups, 
30;  daggers,  33;  diadems,  30;  grave  reliefs, 
34;   lionesses  relief,  30,  34;   masks,  30. 

Mycenaean  art,  30-37  ;  relation  to  Cretan, 
34  ;  seal  rings,  34. 

Myron,  17,  123,  155,  233,  276  ;  date,  18, 
145,  147  ;  material  used  by,  20,  148  ;  lack 
of  originals  by,  219;  taught  by  Hagelai'das, 
18,  100,  14S,  151  ;  by  Hegias,  148  ;  works, 
147-153,  161,  163,  175  ;  Apollo,  151  ; 
Asklepios,  151  ;  Catajo  head,  152  ;  Copen- 
hagen head,  153  ;  Diskobolos,  148-150, 152, 
156  ;  heifer,  151  ,  Herakles,  151  ;  Idolino, 
155,  161  ;  Ince-Blundell  head,  152  ;  Ladas, 
150  ;  Marsyas,  148,  150-151  ;  Munich  oil- 
pourer,  152  ;  Parthenon  metopes,  175  ; 
Perinthos  head,  147,  153  ;  Perseus,  151  ; 
pristae  or  pyctae,  151  ;  Riccardi  bust, 
152  ;  Tarsos  bronze,  152  ;  Zeus,  151. 

Myron  of  Thebes,  later  sculptor,  148. 

Mys,  168. 

Naukratis,  21. 

Naukydes,  of  Argive-Sikyonian   school,    153. 

Naxian  marble,  23,  77  ;  school,  77. 

Naxos,  Apollo  statues,  colossal,  from,  50  ; 
Nikandre  of,  42  ;  regions  of  activity  of 
sculptors  from,  23,  77  ;  statuette,  archaic, 
from,    103-104  ;     unfinished    statue    from, 

25- 
Neo-Attic  revival,  271. 

Nesiotes,  see  Kritios. 

Nestor  group  at  Olympia  by  Onatas,  113. 

Nikandre  from  Delos,  41-44,  46,  52,  77. 

Nike,  figures  from  Akropolis,  75-76  ;  bronze 
figurines  from  Akropolis,  52  ;  figures  as 
akroteria  on  temple  of  Asklepios  at  Epidau- 
ros,  237  ;  of  Delos,  51-53,  63,  75,  95  ;  of 
Mummius  at  Epidauros,  251  ;  by  Paionios 
at    Olympia,    133,   206-207,  247,    250 ;    of 


Samothrake,  52,   207,    247,    249-252  ;    see 

Athena. 
Nikias,  painter  of  statues  by  Praxiteles,  27. 
Nile,  277-278. 
Niobe  group,  216,  247-248. 
Nointel,  176. 
North  Grecian  school,  73. 

"  Occasion,"  see  Kairos. 

Oil-pourer  in  Munich,  152. 

Olympia,  Hellenistic  head  of  boxer,  278  ; 
chariot  group  by  Glaukias,  114  ;  by  Onatas, 
113  ;  Hera  head,  61  ;  Herakles  by  Onatas, 
113  ;  Nestor  group  by  Onatas,  113  ;  Nike 
by  Paionios,  133,  206-207,  247,  25°  '•  num- 
ber of  statues  formerly  at,  16  ;  sculpture, 
archaic,  at,  61-62  ;  primitive  bronze 
statuettes,  21,  38  ;  temple  of  Zeus,  akro- 
teria, 133  ;  gable  groups,  24,  102,  121,  126- 
135,  141,  154,  206,  207  :  metopes,  123,  135- 
137,  141,  194,  234  ;  treasury  of  Megarians, 
gable  sculptures,  61,  65,  260  ;  bronze  head 
of  Zeus,  117  ;  chryselephantine  Zeus  by 
Pheidias,  18,  154,  169-172. 

Olympieion  at  Athens,  166. 

Omphalos,  Apollo  of  the,  145-146. 

Onatas,  works,  113-114,  116;  Apollo  at  Per- 
gamon,  113,  116;  chariot  group  for  Hiero 
of  Syracuse,  113;  black  Demeter  at  Phiga- 
leia,  113;  Herakles  at  Olympia,  113;  Nes- 
tor group  at  Olympia,  113;  Tarentine  group 
at  Delphi,  113. 

Orchomenos,  Apollo  from,  40,  54-55;  stele 
by  Alxenor,  94-95;  replica  of,  from  Apol- 
lonia,  96;    replica  of,  in  Naples,  95-96. 

Orestes  slaying  Aegisthos,  relief  in  Copen- 
hagen, 102-103;  and  Elektra,  group,  280; 
and  Pylades,  group,  280. 

Ornamental  sculpture,  29. 

Otricoli,  Zeus  of,  172,  274,  276. 

Oxyrhynchos  Papyrus,  147. 

Painting  on  Aeginetan  gable  groups,  no; 
bull  and  lions  group  on  Akropolis,  58; 
Peisistratid  temple  of  Athena  on  Akropolis, 
gable  groups,  91 ;  pre-Peisistratean  temple 
of  Athena,  gable  groups,  58,  81 ;  poros 
gable  groups  on  Akropolis,  56—57;  rider  on 
Akropolis,  83;  Alexander  sarcophagus,  243, 
245-246;  Aristion  stele,  91-92;  Calf-bearer, 
59;  Knidian  frieze  at  Delphi,  99;  Maidens 
on  Akrcpolis,  80;  Nikandre  statue,  43; 
ste'.e  from  Orchomenos,  95;  Parthenon 
metopes,  175;  sculpture  in  general,  26-27; 
Selinus  metopes,  63;  Sidon  sarcophagi, 
245-246;  Theseion  metopes,  194;  stele 
from  Velanideza,  93;  wooden  statues,  20, 
23,  26;  temple  of  Zeus  at  Olympia,  gable 
groups,  131. 

Paionios,  akroteria  of  temple  of  Zeus  at 
Olympia,  133;  east  gable  of  temple  of  Zeus 
at  Olympia,  132-134;  Nike  at  Olympia, 
133,  206-207,  247,  25°- 

Palace  of  Alkinoos,  30;   of  Menelaos,  30. 

Panainos,  171. 

Panathenaic  amphora,  on  Skaramanga  vase 
in  Vienna,  118. 

Parian  marble,  23,  24,  196. 


IN  hi  X 


2S9 


Parrhasios,  168. 

Parthenon  frieze,  <;,  87,04,  161,  173, 184-100, 
106,  20::, 
176-18;. 

194.  111    general,    it), 

.■-190,  204. 

i 
• 

Marsyas, 
150  ■ 

153. 
-.  128,  13- 

e,  20. 
Payne  kmcht  bronze  statuette,  t-,  103. 

.•48. 

l'cir..  •  stone 

•-.  23. 
c  Jt|>|>cii  in  fountain 


Pcnel.>(>c,  143. 
Pentc'. 


.    116: 

1  .rc.it 
;  I 
female  >. 

with  name  of  A 
mencs  f; 

ish  Museum,  206. 
.ith,  147,  153. 

\ualid  groups,  255. 

Phar  ,  230-231: 

k  from,  73,  /  :   Thessalian  group  from, 

Phei  172,   i&,. 

371  ;  CI 

:id  I'olykleil 
da-  honoura 

uv 

teacher  .18, 

24.  ;.  212, 

Athena 
Pellene, 

an  irthenon  ■ 

•.  113: 

1   3,  100, 
!     with 


influence,  280:    lack  of  originals   by,  219: 
material  used  by  t  so,  156 ;  method  of  bi 

ting,  j.¥:  taught  by  Hagelaidas,  is,  100, 

151,  iu  ;  works:  237, 

lazon  at   I  l'-cne- 

ventum   bead,  161;    Diadunu  157- 

Doryphoros,  1  >4   1  ;s,  161, 
I  if  ,  161:   Hei 

1     ,160,279;   "■ ''  Farnese.  I     lino, 

;-  ;    Kyni 

Polykleitos,  the  younger,  trophy        I 

potamoi  at  Am] 

•  11,    wall-painting    of    punishment     of 
1  'irkc,  267. 
irwpiroc  Aiflot,  33. 

.  26. 
Port  in  1  'crlin,  156. 

Portraitun  . 

Poseidon,   bronze  statue   from   Krcusis  tlcdi- 
.  11'.    117;    l.atetan,  I ] ;;   of  Mclos, 
271,  273. 

Pi  ixttelean  motive  in  Amazon  type,  159;   S  , 
222,  223,  273. 

Pra»r  .,     ~iS;    influence,  2^4,  271,  276: 

materials  used  by,  21 1,  24  ;   i>l.t>  e  of,  -'i  l 
lation  to  Kepi  ,'39:  statues  painted 

by  Nikias,  -•;;   style,  227,  252,  251.   works. 
16,  17,  28,  124,  213,  214  127, 

239-240,  245,    247-248,    252:     Aphr.idr 

.1-222, 252:  Aphrodite  of  Kot, 
221-222 ;     I  ids,  .        .       1  11I. ulcus, 

226-227:     Hermes,    16,    124,  213,  214, 
222-224,  23s»  illo,    Irtemis, 

in  .11    \l  .mtiiK'i.i,    .■  - ,  .■-•(;    M.iiiiineian 
relief,  225,  24; ;  Maui  ileum  of  Halikamat- 

-47_ 

24b.  iroktonos, 

222. 
Praxiteles,  the  elder,  Athena  I'romachos,  168; 
illo,  225. 
in,  236. 
M\  ton,  1 

by  marble  sculptors,  24- 

2S- 

reek,  79. 

1  defilement  by  birds,  81. 

ipollo  (Aeginetan)  fr  m, 

lo  from,  4"  41 ;  fe- 
male Ital  male 
figu                                                             .    .  55. 
I'm:: 

Purp  .  '8. 

Putcal  in  Madrid,  1  rj 

-.    .■■>.     IIS)      stvlc, 

10    of    the 
0 

147 .   Spinarii  . 
I'y tin  il  11   at    H.ihkar- 

117. 

.  94- 

i 

j  7 

■ 


290 


INDEX 


Relief,  similar  to  Ludovisi  relief,  in  Boston 
Museum  of  Fine  Arts,  140-141 ;  from 
Chrysapha,  29,  60;  Ludovisi,  138-141; 
Mantineian,  225;  of  Penelope,  143;  Villa 
Albani,  73. 

Reliefs,  material  of  archaic  Athenian,  24;  of 
wood,  19;  Argive,  20,  47;  Attic,  influence 
at  Argos,  160-161;  Corinthian,  20, 47;  from 
Heroon  at  Trysa,  211;  from  Knossos,  36; 
from  Mycenae,  34. 

Rhamnus,  Themis  from,  248-249. 

Rhodes,  Colossos  of,  262;  Farnese  bull  group 
at,  247,  265-267;  Helios  and  chariot  by 
Lysippos,  236;  number  of  statues  formerly 
at,  16;  school  of,  261  ff. 

Rhoikos,  traditional  inventor  with  Theodoros 
of  bronze-casting,  21,  46. 

Riccardi  bust,  in  Florence,  152. 

Rings,  Mycenaean  seal,  34. 

Rivers  represented  by  human  figures,  134, 
277-278. 

Rosso  antico,  24. 

Rothschild  bronze  Spinario  from  Sparta,  144. 

Samian  art  from  Athenian  Akropolis,  77. 

Samos,  Hera  from,  54,  76;  replicas  on  Akrop- 
olis, 76-77;  later  archaic  art  at,  74;  statues 
of  Naxian   marble   in,    23 ;    school    of,   48, 

77- 

Samothrake,  Agamemnon,  Talthybios,  Epeios 
relief  from,  50,  73;  Nike  of,  52,  207,  247, 
249-252. 

Sandal-binder,  see  Jason. 

Sarcophagi  of  Sidon,  27,  240-246. 

"  Satan's  Seat,"  258. 

Satrap,  sarcophagus  of,  240-241,  245-246. 

Satyr  by  Myron,  see  Marsyas;  by  Praxiteles, 
219—220,  224;  dancing,  271. 

Sauroktonos  by  Praxiteles,  222. 

Schiller,  15. 

Schliemann's  discoveries,  30-32. 

School,  Aeginetan,  105-117;  of  Antioch,  247; 
Argive,  41,  46,  ioc-103,  132,  144,  t53,  154, 
247;  late,  280;  Argive-Sikyonian,  153,  154, 
228-229;  Asiatic,  261,  265;  Chian.  50-53, 
77;  Pergamene,  247,  253-26^  Rhodian, 
261  ff. ;  Samian,  48,  77 ;  Sikyonian,  103-104. 
153,  228  ff.,  247;  Spartan,  46,  60-61;  of 
Tralles,  247. 

Schools,  local,  38. 

Sciarra  Palace,  Rome,  bronze  statue  from,  103. 

Seal  rings,  Mycenaean,  34. 

Seated  figure,  from  road  between  Argos  and 
Tripoli,  44;  from  Branchidae,  45;  Dipylon, 
45;   Eleutherna,  44;   Miletos,  45. 

Selinus,  metopes  from  temple  C,  61-65,  241; 
from  later  temple,  65,  97;  temple  E,  132, 
137—138,  162;   temple  F,  99—100. 

Seven  wonders  of  the  world,  Colossos  of 
Rhodes,  262;  Mausoleum  at  Halikarnassos, 
216:   Zeus  at  Olympia  by  Pheidias,  170. 

Shield  of  Achilles,  30. 

Sicily,  archaic  sculpture  in,  62. 

Sidon,  sarcophagi  from,  27,  240-246. 

Sikyon,  Herakles  by  Lysippos  at,  234;  Hera- 
kles by  Skopas  in  Gymnasium  at,  215; 
Kairos  by  Lysippos  at,  234;  school  of,  103- 
104,  153,  228  ff.,  247. 


Sikyonians,  treasury  at  Delphi  of,  metopes, 
97-99. 

Silenus  carrying  Dionysos,  271. 

Silver  statues,  in  Homeric  poems,  30. 

Siphnians,  treasury  at  Delphi  of,  Maidens,  197. 

Skaramanga  vase  in  Vienna,  Panathenaic 
amphora  on,  118. 

Skopas,  art  of,  152,  221,  224,  227,  230,  246; 
eye,  an,  214,  218,  228;  influence  of,  251, 
275,  276;  lack  of  originals  by,  219;  mate- 
rials used  by,  20;  style,  252,  253,  260; 
works,  16,  24,  122,  212-218,  224,  227-228, 
23t,  237,  247-248,  252,  276;  Ares  Ludovisi, 
215;  Asklepios  of  Melos,  228,  276;  Askle- 
pios  from  Peiraeus,  215-216;  Athena  in  the 
Uffizi,  216,  252 ;  Capitoline  head  (Herakles) , 
215;  Demeter  of  Knidos,  227-228;  sculp- 
tured drums  from  Artemision  at  Ephesos, 
218;  Genzano  head  (Herakles),  215;  head 
of  goddess  from  Asklepieion  in  Athens, 
2t5;  Herakles  of  Gymnasium  at  Sikyon, 
215;  Meleager,  in  Rome,  215;  Mausoleum 
at  Halikarnassos,  frieze,  122,  214,  216-218, 
237;  head  in  National  Museum,  Athens 
(Aphrodite),  215;  Niobe  group,  216,  247- 
248 ;  temple  of  Athena  Alea  at  Tegea,  gable 
groups,  16,  24,  212-215,  224.  23t- 

Skyllis,  pupil  of  Daidalos,  46,  113  ;  statues 
in  Peloponnesos,  46  ;  in  Sikyon,  46,  103, 
153  ;  teacher  of  Tektaios  and  Angelion,  113. 

Smile,  archaic,  40,  53,  78,  93. 

Smilis,  pupil  of  Daidalos,  46. 

Somzee  athlete,  120-121. 

Sosandra  by  Kalamis,  145. 

Sparta,  reliefs  from,  60-61  ;  Rothschild 
bronze  Spinario  from,  144  ;  school  of,  46, 
60-61  ;  Zeus  at,  by  Klearchosof  Rhegion, 
21. 

Sphinxes  from  Assos,  49. 

Spinario,  143-^5. 

Standing  figures,  archaic,  male,  see  Apollo  ; 
female,  see  Maidens. 

Stele  from  Velanideza,  painted,  93. 

Stephanos,  statue  in  Villa  Albani,  279-280. 

Stolid  type,  in  archaic  sculpture,  40,  54. 

Stone,  use  of,  for  statues,  22,  23. 

Strangford  Apollo,  116  ;  shield  of  Athena 
Parthenos,  166. 

Subiaco  figure,  273-274. 

Tanagra,  Dermys  and  Kitylos  relief  from,  55. 

Tanteti,  see  Maidens. 

Tarentine  group  by  Onatas  at  Delphi,  113. 

Tarentum,  Herakles  by  Lysippos  at,  236. 

Tarsos,  bronze  statue  from,  152. 

Tauriskos,    Farnese  bull  group,  247,  265-267. 

Tegea.  Atalanta  at,  213  ;   Spartan  (?)    relief 

from,   60  ;  temple    of  Athena   Alea,  gable 

groups,  16,  24,  212-215,  224,  231. 
Tektaios,  pupil  of  Dikoinos  and  Skyllis,  46, 

ri3  ;  teacher  of  Kallon,  113. 
Telekles,  of  Samian  school,  46 
Telephos  frieze  from  Great  Altar  of  Zeus  at 

Pergamon,  257,  26r. 
Tenea,  Apollo  of,  40,  60,  68,  113. 
Thasos,  relief  of  Hermes  and   Nymphs  from, 

72-73  ;  tombstone  of  Philis  from,  73. 
Themis  from  Rhamnus,  2^8-2^9. 


INDEX 


291 


Theodoros,  traditional  inventor  with  Rhoikos 
of  bronze  casting,  II  ;  ins.,  notion  on  AkrO- 
polls,  77. 

rau  Apol  .  ;a,  113. 

IhcH'i.ni  al     Athens,    frieze,    194-196,   200; 
gable  gTOups,  is.0-107  ;   metopes,  194-195. 
-piae,  grave  relief  from,  143. 
Tbestaly,    .it.  hail     sculpture   in,   96  ;  green 
marble  from. 

Thorwaldaen,      restored      Aegineian     gable 

groups,  106,  107 
Thr..  relief    of    seated      Askll 

837-238  :    sculptures  of  temple  of  Asklepios 

Kpidauros,  237-238. 
Throne  of  Apollo  al  Amyklai,  47  ;    Ludovisi, 

138-141- 
Timotheos,    Mausoleum    at    Halikarna 
217  :  sculptures  of  temple  at  Asklepio 

Epidauros,  217,  2;7-238. 
Tiryns,  painting  of  bull  from  palace  at,  35. 
Tools  of  marble  sculptors,  24 
I  Belvedere,    270-271;    Medici,    168; 

156. 
Trachyte,  use  for  frieze  of  temple  at  Assos,  49. 
Tralles,  school  of,  247. 
I  monal  per  ,'ture,  117-147. 

.in  British  Museum,  37. 
Treasury  of  the  Athenians  at  Delphi,  meto- 

■   the    Knidians  and    Siphnjant 
at  I  Delphi,  M  '  ti  ins 

at  Otympia,  gable  sculptures,  '1,65,260: 
1!  Delphi,  metopes,  97-99. 
Tripods,  bronze,  from  Ktruri.i,  66,  69-70. 
letnos,  relief  from  Eleusis,  202-205. 
t,  reliefs  fl  al,  ait. 

Tux  1  Ibingi  d,  116. 

Typ"  ilpture,  38 

Typhon,  see  Bluebeard. 

\ntenor,  29,  79,  117- 

by  Krri  ,  118-123: 

I  '.  1 18-120: 

H        relief  of,   118;    Naples  group 

of,  82,  11S-123,  148,  268. 

Unfinished  statues,  24-25. 

■  lumenos,  158. 

-'  "33- 

■ 


Varrakeion    statuette    of   Athena    I'.irtl,. 

,65-. 

111  Berlin,  showii  g  M  irsj  u  and  Athena, 
1 

... 
Kert>h,   showing  Atbcn.  1  contending  with 

■  wing  unfinished  Dl 

itatui 

inthian,  ai  '   i,  47. 

Velletri,  Athena  of,  208. 
Venu  '  ni\,    .>o8:     dci 

Medici,  .!i    Mil  >.   .'47.  »5i   253, 

171. 

os   of,    27O. 

Villa   Alb.1111    relief,   7;;    statue  by  Stcph. 
279-280. 

Vitruvius,  217. 
Votive  offerings,  28. 

Warrior,  B  7-268;  from  1  k 

256. 
Weeping  Womi  m  Sidon, 

241    Z4.'. 

nai  .'it  statue,  I 
Wood,  uses 

\\ 

st. ours,  gildi  d,  it  1  lorinth,  19. 
Wordswortl  . 

tiers     from     llcrculancum,  in     Naples, 

"5°.  235- 
Xanthos,  1  tb  from.  71   71.  96,911; 

SCulptun  nullum,  ait, 

Xenokrati  s  of  Sikyon 
foai. 1,  meaning  of  word,  19;  p  unting  of,  26. 

Youth  from  Perinthos,  147,  153. 
Youths,  sec  Ephi 

Zeus,  (Aeginetan)  head  from  Olympia,  117; 

bos 

at  Span. 1,  .j;   by  I  ron, 

.   .7.',  2-4.  .•-'  .    By  I'heidias  .11 

<  ilympia,  18,  17a;    ltbom.it. is  by 

Hageuldas,  154;    temple  of,  al   Olympia, 

akt  '-I. 

126    135,   X4Z,  .  metopes, 

»35-'37.  '■»',  '94,  234- 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


fl) 


FEC'D  LO-URt 

;  APR   st*S 
APR  0  S»  1985 


r 


;i 


RECEIVED 

MAR  1  8  1986 


.'>, 


%%x* 


.«!* 


NOV  2  3  1987 


ORION 


BBS,   JAN02» 
REC'D  LD-URI3 

JAN  1  6  1990 


APR  1 


»  WHT 


58  00827 


123 


4 


V 


SOUTHS**   RRA' 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A  A      000  281520    r 


